High Court OKs Personal Property Seizures

[Commissar Rob]

So, for my first ever news item, I'll post something that has absolutely nothing to do with gaming, but still....

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development.

Is it just me, or is this really, really scary stuff?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/23/scotus.property.ap/index.html

[emperordahc]

Yup. Take your home and sell it to somebody who wants to run a business in it. Great stuff. :|

[Talltale]

Oh Canada....

[Hizawky]

Uhhh... this has been going on forever.

How do you think they built the railroads? The interstate highways?

The railroads were a private company. They got the land they needed through this very same practice over one hundred and fifty years ago.

[Bone]

Yes, but in the past, eminent domain was restricted. It used to be that the property needed to be condemned, or the land needed to be intended for public use. This ruling removes the restrictions, allowing the land to be taken almost arbitrarily, against the wishes of the property owner.

It doesn't surprise me, because everything our administration and our courts have done in the last few years has been to benefit corporations more than the average citizen.

[crashedout]

This has not been going on forever. Eminent domain was for public projects, this ruling allows developers to take your land. Big difference. All they have to do is convince enough of your local government that their plan is better for the community and they can take your land, regardless of the state it is in. In areas that have had huge housing booms this is bad news.

I will admit the area that the lawsuit is based on is not the nicest looking area nor is it a slum. Those people have lived there a while and if they really want a hotel there then it is up to the developer to convince them to sell, not to use the local government to foreclose on them. Bad govt, bad.

[Tharsis]

Good morning! Welcome to China!

:eek:

[Borys]

Glad I live in Europe.

[Rakael]

True, it has been going on for a while. Now the local autorities can make you leave your home of 50 years just because a 7-11 wants that spot. Not a good thing at all.

Edit: My grandmother once got 400k out of a company that wanted her land because she was able to hold out while everyone else sold for 50-100k. Now it seems that people do not have that option. One more thing to add as well, the people they bring in to appraise your land and home NEVER, EVER, EVER give you what its worth. A lot of people are going to get screwed over so that we can have even more shopping malls, Red Lobsters, and fast food joints. Fucking wonderful.

[chronocrash]

It's kind of already happened where I live:
http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3432138&nav=0RdEafDN

This is pretty bad stuff. Has anyone else noticed how corporate spending and growth has escalated to a ridiculous level over the past 4-6 years? Accelerated, while "balances" in place like minimum wage haven't risen to contend with the faultering consumer economy. I discussed this in a class yesterday, to which I was given a reply (paraphrased) "This is a free-market economy, where companies and corporations have the strongest word... and the word is profit."

[Heretic Machine]

Hey US Government, thanks for paying for my college education. As soon as I get that degree, I'll be qualified enough to find a job in another country, and hopefully help make them the best country in the whole wide world :)

[Varsity]

Unless I'm very much mistaken, this is Communism in practice?

[Praetor-Vong]

This is not good.
Perhaps we should change our name to USCA...United States of Corporate America.

[Bone]

If this is what wakes up citizens to the problems of our government (even after a blatantly illegal war fueled by manufactured documents), I can only say... what took everybody so long?

[SteveRage]

God love America, because soon , no-one else will.
Simply unbelievable

[chronocrash]

If this is what wakes up citizens to the problems of our government (even after a blatantly illegal war fueled by manufactured documents), I can only say... what took everybody so long?

And even this will blow over as soon as it's pushed to the be just a little blip of news coverage, like everything else that's "real."
And rest assured, the "news" will find atleast one (paid-off) crackpot (representative of the common people like you and me) to stand in front of the camera and spout complacent dribble about how it's really ok, people will lighten up and get used to the idea, and g_dbless the usa.

[Rakael]

If this is what wakes up citizens to the problems of our government (even after a blatantly illegal war fueled by manufactured documents), I can only say... what took everybody so long?

We can hope. I wouldn't hold my breath though. Mr. "Serving Corporate Interest" Bush has been kicking the little guy since he got in office, all the while fooling the morons into thinking that he cares about them.

[Savok]

This isn't the government's fault, it's the courts. You should see the crazy shit that happens here in Australia with the legal system.

I may be a RWDB who's into a free market, deregulation and all that shit, but that doesn't mean you strip away everything. Just what does the word "ownership" mean to those judges?

[gorlop]

Cool. I think Evil Avatar should ask local governments to seize the homes of the Supreme Court Justices and build Evil Avatar gaming centers and pizza shops on the respective properties. I also think W's ranch would make a great location for a Piggly Wiggly grocery store.

[Mr. Croup]

We can hope. I wouldn't hold my breath though. Mr. "Serving Corporate Interest" Bush has been kicking the little guy since he got in office, all the while fooling the morons into thinking that he cares about them.

Haha, you do realize that the conservatives of the court: Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist were in the minority on this decision, right? I'm more conservative myself, but even I was surprised to hear that it was the liberals screwing over the little guy this time. What a great country.

[themulf]

The right to a gun has never been clearer. Armed resistance would be a symoblic action aginst ones home being 'stolen.' Of course this would only be twisted by the corporate news. Its more and more clear how corporations and goverment is fusing, out of greed and power to more control us. Dast ist shada.



vote nader!

[Savok]

Two things.

It's not communism, it's capitalism running wild.

Secondly, I wasn't aware wars had to be legal? Who determines the legality of war anyway?

[Lodin]

And yet another reason to be thankfull I don't live in the hell-hole the US is turning into...

[bapenguin]

Two things.

It's not communism, it's capitalism running wild.

Secondly, I wasn't aware wars had to be legal? Who determines the legality of war anyway?

The UN does.

[Steamtron]

I hate to say this seeing as every other person on this thread has mentioned the same thing, but I'm extra glad to be Canadian at the moment. I really hope that there's enough public outcry over this that the decision eventually gets overturned. Maybe the politicians will actually pull their heads out of their asses and work together on this one.

[agentgray]

Everyone must read Jennifer Government. It is a good satire as to what corporate America might turn into.

[Kelegacy]

George Bush, The Patriot Act, The 9/11 Game politicians like to play nowadays...

...we are headed towards an Orwellian world. Face it. And most of this started just over 4 years ago, with the induction of a new president. Or at least that's how my pessimistic side sees it.

[riposte101]

We can hope. I wouldn't hold my breath though. Mr. "Serving Corporate Interest" Bush has been kicking the little guy since he got in office, all the while fooling the morons into thinking that he cares about them.

This should not be blamed on the administration. Every single democrat in the Supreme Court voted for this. The vote broke down like this 5-4. Every single one of those that dissented was a Republican. Every Democrat voted for the measure to pass.

[fushi]

Glad I live in Europe.
Yurp, not Europe.

[FyrionX]

Supreme Court decisions really have nothing to do with what party the justice is. I mean Sandra Day O'Conner was appointed by Reagan and she's been quite liberal on many of her decisions, despite the often label of conservative. The Supreme Court justices have never simply gone with their party. Back during FDR's days, the Supreme Court was extremely conservative while he was trying to get New Deal legislation passed, and it eventually allowed much of his New Deal reform to pass.

[Intruder]

Yea, before you start placing blame, look and see who did it first. This was a liberal innitiative, not a conservative one. This is big government at it's worst, and that is the liberal mentality.

Take the time and read the actual (http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/23jun20051201/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-108.pdf)
Supeme Court ruling, you will see that the Conservative judges make it very clear that this is a "Dangerous" ruling and precident.

As for those of you bitching about leaving the U.S. then please do so. We do not want or need you pansy crying asses here. Run away instead of fighting for your rights is the practice of cowards.

If you do not like this decision then make it known, write your Congressman, call them, call your newspaper or station. Do some research and get involved.

But sadly most of you all who are bitching will just sit back in your chair, pull up some porn or pop in another game while you rant about how bad and evil the U.S. is.

[Citizen Philip]

*sigh* I love Canada, mostly because compared to the US, I live in Paradise with bad weather.

For those who want to know:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/index.html
How to immigrate to Canada, I took the liberty of selecting English to read the webpage.

And for those where Canada just isn't far enough from the States:
http://www.immigration.govt.nz/
How to immigrate to New Zealand.

And just for fun:
http://www.britsintheus.com/immigration-uk.htm
How to immigrate to the United Kingdom.

---

And since I'm lucky, I have citizenships in each of those places. Me > You.

[Librum]

*rubs eyes* This is what happens when you discuss law on a gaming website. I think everyone needs to read the opinion and educate themselves on the concepts involved before the ever-so-predictable 'I hate the US/the Republicans/corporations' responses start rolling in. Frankly I think it's irresponsible to post this under the heading of 'High Court OKs Personal Property Seizures', since that's really got nothing to do with the reason the case was important. That being said, I disagree with the overbroad definition of 'public use' that the court has decided to adopt. You should not, howevert think that the government taking your land (with compensation of course, but exactly how much is always another matter) is anything new.

[Dr.Finger]

The court also said states have the right and responsibility to regulate these type of seizures, so hopefully some states will work to keep these type of seizures under control.

[Malovech]

You guys are two steps away from the Thought Police! I am so glad I live in Canada.

[Bone]

Yea, before you start placing blame, look and see who did it first. This was a liberal innitiative, not a conservative one. This is big government at it's worst, and that is the liberal mentality.

Funny you say that, because the neoconservative movement (that's right, not traditional conservatives, but the guys now in power) has done more to make the government big and involved in our life than any liberal in history.

I don't identify along party lines, even though I tend to be more liberal. I would vote for a true Republican conservative if they had good credentials and ideas. Unfortunately our president and his cabinet and other cronies are so far away from what passes for conservatism, it's ridiculous.

Someone asked "since when do wars need to be legal"? Well, we have in the past never attacked a sovereign nation without being attacked. We also used to respect the Geneva Convention. And to the point: a war is illegal when you manipulate and manufacture facts to dupe an entire country (and a few others) into going to war. Lying to Congress is illegal last time I checked.

[Dirty Harry]

I said this before somewhere else about the same subject and all i have to say is OH CANADA.......

[Savok]

The same UN that's rampant with ccrruption (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4445609.stm) with Oil-For-Food? The same UN that's letting Mugabe run rampant with borderline genocide (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4101228.stm) (and have Zimbabwe on the human rights council no less)? The same UN that has some of the worst peacekeepers (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1413501,00.html) in the modern age (and it's not just Congo, Australian troops pulled weapons on them in East Timor)?

[Dirty Harry]

You guys are two steps away from the Thought Police! I am so glad I live in Canada.
harrison bergion?

[automaton]

This thread goes to show you how much the Bush administration has blurred the lines between conservative and liberal. I used to consider myself an conservative, but I can't stand Bush and 90% of his policies. Rush Limbaugh (an accepted mouth piece for the conservative right) makes me sick to my stomach. Every time I hear a "conservative" talk about how the "liberals" love big government I laugh my ass off. The government has gotten bigger under W than any previous president. It is really fucked up to hear Howard Dean talk about wanting to balance the budget and Dick Cheney say that huge deficits are ok.

Political discourse in the US is completely fucked.

[Citizen Philip]

The same UN that's rampant with ccrruption (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4445609.stm) with Oil-For-Food? The same UN that's letting Mugabe run rampant with borderline genocide (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4101228.stm) (and have Zimbabwe on the human rights council no less)? The same UN that has some of the worst peacekeepers (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1413501,00.html) in the modern age (and it's not just Congo, Australian troops pulled weapons on them in East Timor)?

Uh Dude. Where is your army, why are they there, when are they coming back? kthxbye.

[Savok]

Neocons are libertarian mostly. Courts taking away people's right to ownership goes completely against that. No, the neocons aren't in power, the current lot did ride a neocon wave into office however.

Control is indeed a liberal tendency, because they always know best.

[koobz]

THat's crazy. Just goes to show you, money will buy anything. You won't sell me your land? Fine, I'll sue.

[FyrionX]

My dad is a lawyer and I took the liberty of looking through his hundreds of law books and I found more information about this. According to New Jersey state laws, eminent domain is already supported. :
"Upon the institution of an action to fix the compensation to be paid, or at any time thereafter, the director or the board, as the case may be, may file with the Clerk of the Superior Court a declaration of taking, declaring that the possession of one or more of the tracts or parcels of property described in the petition is thereby being taken by and for the use of the State or the college. The declaration of taking shall be sufficient if it sets forth (1) a description of each tract or parcel of property to be taken; (2) a statement of the estate or interest in the said property being taken; and (3) a statement of the sum of money estimated by the director or the board to be just compensation for the taking. Upon the filing of said declaration, the director or the board shall deposit with the Clerk of the Superior Court the amount of the estimated compensation stated in said declaration." (20:1-3.11)
This court decision merely reaffirmed what has been active for many years.

[Intruder]

Funny you say that, because the neoconservative movement (that's right, not traditional conservatives, but the guys now in power) has done more to make the government big and involved in our life than any liberal in history.

I'll agree with you on that. Bush has pushes into the Big Govt. side and I do not like that. However I was speaking strictly in context of the SC ruling. If you go to the fringes you can always find whacky ideas on both sides. Overall I am glad Bush is our President during these times, though I do not always agree with him, and sometimes outright hate what he does. Don't peg me for one of those "Yes" men of a particualr party. I try to think on my own and draw my own conclusions from there.

BTW I always love these kinds of debates, because if you are a thinking person you may find that your ideas begin to change or you learn something different. Very fun and educational.

[automaton]

Control is indeed a liberal tendency, because they always know best.

That is horseshit. "Modern Conservatives" are using morals to control aspects of everyone's daily lives. They want to outlaw and ban everything that doesn't agree with their religion.

Ban video game sales to minors
Ban gay and lesbian marriage/civil unions
Ban burning the American Flag
Give money to faith based organizations

These are all conservative movements. A liberatarian would never support any of this. "Knowing best" is something the conservatives are best at these days.

[Savok]

Uh Dude. Where is your army, why are they there, when are they coming back? kthxbye.

Iraq, protecting the contracters rebuilding Iraq, training the new Iraqi Army (who recently rescued an Australian hostage, ta guys), among other things. They'll be back when the job is done.

East Timor, until recently anyway, see they had a vote and wanted out of Indonesia, they wouldn't let go so we went in to help them liberate themselves.

Western islands of Indonesia, to my knowledge they're still helping with the earthquake/tsunami relief efforts. They'll be back when they've done all they can.

Singapore, considering they do a lot of their military training here (especially air force), we'd likely have some over there.

[Wonka]

This was not a liberal vs conservative issue. In fact, I am getting a little bit tired of that oversimplification and its wrong headed conclusions. Not every conservative out there loves Jesus, in fact if you ask me they have a pretty bad track record with that guy. And at the same time not every liberal is out to protect the "little guy" (again, very bad track record here). The supreme court was not even very interested in whether or not the government was in the right on this matter. The job of the courts is to INTERPRET the law. And unfortunately, they found the law to be somewhat LACKING (meaning the fifth amendment). The conclusion that that reached (barely), was that their hands were tied and that there wasn't enough legal basis for stating that this percieved wrongness couldn't go on. Many of us may now be wishing that at least one more of them had decided to be an "activist" judge this time, but unfortunately that is not what happened.

So the only way to fix this would be for enough citizens to get mad that a law could get written and passed. The ball has been officially placed into in OUR court now people. Now are you going to bitch, or are you going to call your congressman? I would encourage you to stop being a pansy, show a little spine, and take democracy by the reigns. It *is* supposed to be your job (you know as CITIZENS) to steer it after all.

[Bone]

Intruder: I agree, it's fine as long as we don't start calling each other traitors for having differing opinions (like our politicians on both sides are now doing). Although I'm not glad Bush is our president during these times- I feel like he's botched every task that's been handed to him. Even now the party line is "we're winning the war" (the war that ended "major operations" back in 2003, remember?) but we have no real idea how to rebuild a country in Iraq, let alone install a democracy in a culture that has no idea how to use one. Winning this kind of war is a lot more than being able to bomb the other side into rubble.

I was also suprised to see that this court decision was mostly from the Democratic side. I guess everyone on both sides is more concerned with corporation's wealth than the well-being of the citizens.

[Vulture]

Bone:

You do realize that Saddam paid for the killing of American Citizens, ordered attacks on US military forces, and authorized an assasination attempt on the American President.

Good enough reasons for most americans.

[Savok]

That is horseshit. "Modern Conservatives" are using morals to control aspects of everyone's daily lives. They want to outlaw and ban everything that doesn't agree with their religion.

Ban video game sales to minors
Ban gay and lesbian marriage/civil unions
Ban burning the American Flag
Give money to faith based organizations

These are all conservative movements. A liberatarian would never support any of this. "Knowing best" is something the conservatives are best at these days.

You're mixing up the old religious right with the neocons. Neocons put up with the religious right because the alternative is considered worse (socialism and communism). A lot of neocons spend their time teaching the religious right what modern civilization means.

[Rakael]

I respect your opinion on Bush Intruder, though mine differs greatly. I loathe the man and everything he and his administration does. America was disliked around the world before, now we are outright hated due mostly to things he has done. I could go deeper into the things I disagree with, but I can't seem to get my thoughts collected. No coffee or cigarettes and a burning rage that builds just when thinking about our illustrious president just makes me want to type FUCK BUSH over and over again.

[Bone]

Savok, please read the last year or two of history and you will realize that the neocons are even worse that the old religious right. A lot of Reagan-era conservatives are distancing themselves from this new movement, which shares nothing with conservatism but a hijacked name.

The Terri Schiavo case should have hammered it home: today's neocons want to tell you how to live and even how to die. You can't die with dignity because "the Bible said!".

[falak]

Neocons are libertarian mostly. Courts taking away people's right to ownership goes completely against that. No, the neocons aren't in power, the current lot did ride a neocon wave into office however.The Neocons are in power. Are you aware that Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld are members of PNAC? Donald Rumsfeld was a co-founder.

You seem to be forgetting which nation most of the money went to, regarding UN oil corruption.

[Rakael]

This was not a liberal vs conservative issue. In fact, I am getting a little bit tired of that oversimplification and its wrong headed conclusions. Not every conservative out there loves Jesus, in fact if you ask me they have a pretty bad track record with that guy. And at the same time not every liberal is out to protect the "little guy" (again, very bad track record here). The supreme court was not even very interested in whether or not the government was in the right on this matter. The job of the courts is to INTERPRET the law. And unfortunately, they found the law to be somewhat LACKING (meaning the fifth amendment). The conclusion that that reached (barely), was that their hands were tied and that there wasn't enough legal basis for stating that this percieved wrongness couldn't go on. Many of us may now be wishing that at least one more of them had decided to be an "activist" judge this time, but unfortunately that is not what happened.

So the only way to fix this would be for enough citizens to get mad that a law could get written and passed. The ball has been officially placed into in OUR court now people. Now are you going to bitch, or are you going to call your congressman? I would encourage you to stop being a pansy, show a little spine, and take democracy by the reigns. It *is* supposed to be your job (you know as CITIZENS) to steer it after all.


I appreciate your vigor, but if one more person tells me to quit wasting my time having a good discussion and "call my congressman," I'm going to fucking loose it. Granted, it is our duty to do what we can. Sadly, in todays world, that is very little. Sure we can call our congressmen and write them mean letters, but in the end its just a bunch of messages on the phone and a couple of trashbags for the dumpster.

We could also get out and vote, but for whom? Politicians never tell the truth, especially when on a campaign. Its all come down to who has the most money, the flashiest stage show, best attack ads and the "I'm better than he is" ads. Not to mention that with all the sheep out there easily swayed by these campaigns, the few who actually give a damn are left out.

So have at it there man, call your congressman, write them nasty letters, vote for the other guy. I'm just getting closer and closer to moving out in the middle of nowhere and saying fuck the world.

[Librum]

For anyone who wants a more reasoned treatment of this topic, I direct you to the following site: http://techcentralstation.com/062305C.html

[Intruder]

Bone:No Worries here :) However, I have a very close friend you is fighting in Iraq as we speak. He has survived daily ambushes on he and his men, all at the age of 25. Everytime he comes home he assures me that every month is better than the last, and that things are getting better. He tells me that people have changed since the Hussain times for the better. Heck, he now rides secondary to Iraqi soldiers and police, watching them take care of things, helping them when needed. He tells us that attacks are slowing down, but remember they are dealing with people who value no life at all, so those attacks will in all likelyhood not stop anytime in the near future. I take my info from the men and women serving there, not the news networks who each have aggendas. My info comes from those who's only aggenda is to get back home and kick it with friends, but only after the job is done.

As for installing a democracy, remeber Japan? They never knew a democracy till we came about and now they are one of the most successful countries in the world. Look at Lebenon and Iran and those countries who are now craving for freedom, is this not a good thing?

"The major-operations" speech was a mistake but lets get over that, he didn't mean the job was done, we all knew that that he menat the major ground push into Iraq was done, but there was alot more to do. If people thought we would be out of Iraq in a few years, then they are idiots. Bush said from the beginning we will be there for a LONGGG time.

And finally, we have lost 1,700 approx. soldiers during the last couple of years. Very sad and i hope that each of them are at some peace along with their families. God knows my friends could be among them tomorrow. But lets not forget that 1,700 U.S. soldiers is an INSANELY small amount for a war that had been raging for years. That many died each MONTH in Vietnam.

Okay sorry for the thread hijack but I just wanted to let you here some of the things running through my mind. I respect your opinion and hope that you continue to voice it! That is what is great, while we are free to say what we think, there are millions around the world who would have just been killed had they done what we just have.

[Bone]

Falak is right, many of those in power now are neocons by definition. These are people who have been planning Iraq War 2 (This time... it's personal!) since the mid-nineties, saying we just needed an event like Pearl Harbor to make people fearful enough to go along with it. They took advantage of the murder of thousands of people to fight a war that had nothing to do with the murderers.

[Savok]

let alone install a democracy in a culture that has no idea how to use one.

I love that mentality people on the left have, saying that Iraq is too stupid to have a democracy. And everyone thinks the right are racist, we aren't the ones who live in constant guilt and feed Africa money that doesn't do a bloody thing in the long term except keep everyone poor and tyrants in power.

And America has attacked plenty of countries without being attacked first, learn your history. Clinton (and everyone else) went after Yugoslavia in the 90s. Reagan in one his more paranoid moments invaded Grenada. The further you go back in history the more you find.

Actually come to think of it the first Gulf War was because they invaded Kuwait. Last time the US was attacked first was WW2 I think, even then they were 6 months off joining the fight anyway.

[Jetherik]

The court also said states have the right and responsibility to regulate these type of seizures, so hopefully some states will work to keep these type of seizures under control.

This is the important factor - STATES Have the right and responsibility to regulate these types of seizures. What the "liberal" judges have done is what they always do, given the power to the states. This is only a Federal Ruling and Federal guidlines. Though, it is scary at how the developers are licking their lips.

[Bone]

I love that mentality people on the left have, saying that Iraq is too stupid to have a democracy.

I didn't say they were too stupid, I also said I don't identify with the left. Leave it to you to put words in my mouth.

Iraq doesn't know how to use a democracy because, historically, they have never lived that way. Plus there are so many ethnic and religious groups there fighting for control, democracy will not take hold without a long, bloody civil war. But if you think our democracy-building exercise is going well, continue to keep your head in the sand.


And America has attacked plenty of countries without being attacked first, learn your history.

Attacking a country is a little different than a full-scale war and invasion with regime change. This Iraq war is without precedent, because unlike the first one, we aren't defending anybody.

[TacRod]

What I have learned from this thread:

Some Democrat judges have made it easier for "the big guy" to take other people's land. This means George Bush is a communist, so everyone has to move to Canada.

Got it.

Back to SWAT 4.

[Intruder]

Rakeal, if you feel that disenfranchised, then run for an office. Rakeal for Senate!!!! Seriously though apathy leads no where. Just because a fight looks or even is futile, does that mean that it should not take place? Seriously though, I do not know what you do, but many high govt. leaders started out in common jobs such as Exterminator, School Teacher, etc... But then again, using your mentality, what change could just one man bring? Why even bother, ohhh screw it!!! I'm moving to the Greenland! :)

TacROD: ROTFL Besure not to violate any of those criminals civil right while pumping them full of .45s. They might get pissed and move to Canada as well.

[Kefkataran]

Pretty scary stuff if you ask me. Even if the government doesn't intend it to be used for ill, the possibility will still always be there for a far worse administration (does such a thing exist?) to do so in the future.

[Jetherik]

We could also get out and vote, but for whom? Politicians never tell the truth, especially when on a campaign. Its all come down to who has the most money, the flashiest stage show, best attack ads and the "I'm better than he is" ads. Not to mention that with all the sheep out there easily swayed by these campaigns, the few who actually give a damn are left out.

And that is what the politicians want us to think. That we cannot change the world, that our vote is just meaningless. Because right now, it is if we do not go out and vote. Who to vote for? Vote for the guy who is not the incumbant. Vote the incumbants out of office and the politicians will start to listen, especially if we keep putting new people in each term. Right now the incumbant knows they are safe so they can do whatever helps them, not the people they represent. And by some chance your politicians doesn't piss you off, then make sure you go vote for them again...

[Rakael]

RakAEl, get it right pal! ;)

I do agree that the fight needs to be fought, and I have done things in the past. What you hear from me though is not apathy, its burning rage and frustration. I love this country and absolutely hate the way its going. It just seems that the way things are falling apart, nothinng short of an armed uprising would accomplish anything, and even that wouldn't do much. We have all played RTS games, riflemen do not stand up to tanks.

I hope we can pull together and change things for the better; I just have to be a realist and say that its not going to happen.

[Savok]

Yugoslavia saw a full scale invasion with regime change. And silly me I completely forgot about Afganistan, bit more recent then WW2.

The new movement you're talking is a new thrust of the religious right, with Bush in power they're crawling out of the woodwork.

Funny you should mention civil war (http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/21/news/rebels.php). Again, why aren't they able to handle a democracy? Because there are people with different opinions and backgrounds? The UK got its without civil war, and they have Scots living there, Scots.

[Rakael]

Jethrik, I do agree with you. However, it takes more than just a pissed off few to actually vote them out of office. Bush got reelected for godsakes.

[Intruder]

RakAEL!!! You dont use riflemen, get some Tesla Coils!!!! DUHH!!!

BTW I bet several people felt that it wouldn't make a difference if we stood up against the Migthy British Empire, and that we would be crushed. But, even so people took a stand and change occured, abiet without Tesla Coils. Or all of the protests of the Vietnam War, do you not think that had an impact, by George it did no matter how you felt about the war. What about the suffrage movements, the Civil Rights marches, the sit ins? All of these started with just a few people, and then slowly avalanched into a boneified movement. The same thing could happen now.

BTW sorry if I seem too optimistic, I am a 25yr old High School history teacher and motivateing kids to understand that they can make a difference is one thing I struggle at daily.

[Rakael]

Good luck with that Intruder, and that is not sarcasm. I hope you can motivate those children to change things.

[Heretic Machine]

Bush's reelection proves that democracy in this country has finally failed. It's all down hill from here. I mean, you can talk about changing the country, and revolutionizing our political system... But honestly, it's much easier to jump ship.

[TacRod]

TacROD: ROTFL Besure not to violate any of those criminals civil right while pumping them full of .45s. They might get pissed and move to Canada as well.

Ain't nobody moving anywhere when I'm through with them. The lucky crooks are the ones I just shoot in the knee after I arrest them. Negative reinforcement, etc. This game needs a "Renegade Cop" mode where it takes like 3 points to pass to the next mission.

Anyway, I don't know why everyone wants to go to Canada. Japan is where the hot chicks are at. Or Australia for the superior weather and Australianality at the very least.

[Bone]

Afghanistan was harboring/run by the people who attacked our country on 9/11. This is the closest you can get to an official "army" attacking us, and we did the right thing to invade them. I only wish we would have stayed to finish the job.

Yugoslavia, I honestly don't know enough about, but I don't recall us occupying them. I seem to remember bombing them until they withdrew forces from Kosovo.

You linked to a piece confirming that Iraq has already begun fighting its civil war while we are still there. Which indicates to me that whether or not we stay in Iraq, "Jeffersonian democracy" is not likely to exist for a long, long time.

[Rakael]

I'm headed for Japan. Just have to do that whole learning the language thing.

[GrinR]

What I have learned from this thread:

Some Democrat judges have made it easier for "the big guy" to take other people's land. This means George Bush is a communist, so everyone has to move to Canada.

Got it.

Back to SWAT 4.

Exactly.

These threads are my way of detecting who on EA is worth talking to. The simpletons rant *cough* bone *cough* - the smart folks discuss and explain *cough* intruder *cough*.

So what else is new.

[pur3r4ge]

Am I the only one here who's kinda annoyed to see this news item posted on evilavatar? I come here to read game news. It's all well and good to debate politics, and I certainly have strong feelings about these issues, but I hope not to see more political posts. I come to places like this to escape this sort of stuff (except arguing politics as it relates to 25 to life, Jack Thompson, and video game related politics in general)

That said, I'm really suprised that this has remained relatively civil for this many posts. Bravo for that.

[Bone]

Ah, GrinR thinks me a simpleton because I "rant". I was having a decent conversation with Intruder, and have defended myself against Savok's attacks. I don't see that as a rant.

But thanks GrinR, now I know that you are not worth talking to, apparently.

[Savok]

It's a stretch, why I forgot about it.

Don't you remember the pictures of tanks with "K4" painted on them and Frenchmen standing around them smoking?

And you completely the missed the point. The insurgents are fighting each other now, rather then a setback for Iraq it's hilarious and will only help Iraq in the long run, especially if the old Saddam supporters win because they can be reasoned with.

[FyrionX]

Bush's reelection proves that democracy in this country has finally failed. It's all down hill from here. I mean, you can talk about changing the country, and revolutionizing our political system... But honestly, it's much easier to jump ship.

I agree with you to a great degree. The re-election of Bush has forced me to lose faith in the American electorate. But, to quote the Queen of Naboo in Episode 2: The day we stop believing democracy can work is the day we lose it.

[Bone]

And you completely the missed the point. The insurgents are fighting each other now, rather then a setback for Iraq it's hilarious and will only help Iraq in the long run, especially if the old Saddam supporters win because they can be reasoned with.

I understood your point- it's just not clear to me that insurgents are attacking other insurgents or if they are just bombing civilians (as seems to be the case).

At the risk of GrinR thinking me a simpleton (oh NOES!), explain how it's a good thing if Saddam's supporters win? Won't we end up with the same kind of government we just invaded?

Thanks for the intelligent conversation, and for keeping it largely civil.

[Savok]

Rage, you aren't the only one.

As for the relection of Bush, well, you can blame the Democrats for that, Kerry was hardly an alternative

[Rakael]

I agree, this has been the most civil and entertaining political convo in a long time.

[TrackZero]

This property seizures got passed today, as well as that list of all young people to be recruited for military. *shudder*

Makes me glad I live in Canada.

[Savok]

I understood your point- it's just not clear to me that insurgents are attacking other insurgents or if they are just bombing civilians (as seems to be the case).

At the risk of GrinR thinking me a simpleton (oh NOES!), explain how it's a good thing if Saddam's supporters win? Won't we end up with the same kind of government we just invaded?

Thanks for the intelligent conversation, and for keeping it largely civil.
Civilians tend not to fire back.

Saddam supporters will give up, Jihadists blow themselves up.

[camberiu]

I find it funny that people are suprised and/or upset. Most of you have been all for "more power to the state" for as long as I have been in this forum. You defend the state regulating the sales of games, who and from where software companies can hire, the patriot act, gitmo,etc...And now you are surprised about this? Guess what buddies, the state is a hungry monster and will take away from you as much as it can. You gave up a little bit of your freedom thinking you were going to be better off, and now you begin to realize that the beast you thought you controlled is much bigger and hungrier than what you first had imagined. YOU hailed the all mighty state. YOU wanted it to be your nanny. YOU thought it would be good to give it more and more power. Now it is YOU who will take up in the ass, with the compliment of your wonderful government. This is EXACTLY what the economist nobel prize winner F.A. Hayek had described in the book "The Road to Serfdom". This government is your monster, and it will be downhill from here.

[TrackZero]

Anyway, I don't know why everyone wants to go to Canada. Japan is where the hot chicks are at. Or Australia for the superior weather and Australianality at the very least.

Japan has some cultural differences some people might not like, ditto with Australia. Canada's more culturally and physically close to the states, that's why it's usually used as the "I'm moving there". target.

[TrackZero]

I find it funny that people are suprised and/or upset. Most of you have been all for "more power to the state" for as long as I ave bene in this forum. You defend the state regulating the sales of games, who and from where software companies can hire, the patriot act, gitmo,etc...And now you are surprised about this?

What are you talking about? I'd say most EA people come across with the "it's your own responsibility" (i.e. Libertarian) viewpoint. Every article about the government meddling with our industry has people wishing they'd piss off and let the publishers handle it themselves.

[Intruder]

I would also like to say that this has been a great discussion! Very well thought out and handled. As for me being intelligent, well that is debateable and you would have to ask my wife :) And I do think that Bone is having a very informative discussion even though we disagree he has been most gentlemenly in his arguements, as have most everyone here.

Savok you are a good man! I don't know you but I sure as hell like ya!

[Savok]

Might want to consider that Japan has taken to pissing off (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15706467-23109,00.html) as many people as possible lately before moving there.

[camberiu]

Afghanistan was harboring/run by the people who attacked our country on 9/11. This is the closest you can get to an official "army" attacking us, and we did the right thing to invade them. I only wish we would have stayed to finish the job.



So, we are not there???? You might want ot mention that to all 50 American soldiers who have died there in 2004 alone.

[Savok]

http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2005/03/good-news-from-afghanistan-part-10.html

[eatme]

I find it funny that people are suprised and/or upset. Most of you have been all for "more power to the state" for as long as I have been in this forum. You defend the state regulating the sales of games, who and from where software companies can hire, the patriot act, gitmo,etc...

Uh, dude, you're in the Evil Avatar forums. You seem to think you're posting at Blue's.

[Kefkataran]

Uh, dude, you're in the Evil Avatar forums. You seem to think you're posting at Blue's.

haHA!

Personally, I gave up arguing politics in online forums a long time ago. I know my opinion, and I love debating face-to-face or on the phone or even on AIM, but on forums it just gets too ridiculous and no progress is ever made towards better ideas.

Still, as far as political debate threads go, this one is pretty interesting. Me, I'm a hardcore idealist like that 25-year-old history teacher who posted earlier in the thread. I think things can be changed and are worth fighting over. My two cents.

[KarmaGhost]

Hey everybody! Come join me in this handbasket, we're going to take a little trip!

[Bone]

So, we are not there???? You might want ot mention that to all 50 American soldiers who have died there in 2004 alone.

No, we're obviously still there, but the majority of our forces are elsewhere. I suggested that if we spent the Iraq war chest in Afghanistan, we may have had different results.

[Malovech]

Bone:

You do realize that Saddam paid for the killing of American Citizens, ordered attacks on US military forces, and authorized an assasination attempt on the American President.


You do realize that America created Saddam don't you? What goes around comes around...

[Bone]

http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2005/03/good-news-from-afghanistan-part-10.html

There are definitely good stories coming from Afghanistan; I have said that we had a lot more justification invading their country than we did invading Iraq. I'm certainly not one to say we should never go to war.

But here's some news that doesn't get picked up as much: the Taliban are still very much active, if underground, and still committing atrocities:

http://tampatrib.com/nationworldnews/MGB2Q9WIQ9E.html

I simply would have preferred we stay in that country and finish rebuilding before focusing on a new and unrelated war. It's well-known that our military is spread thin, and that recruiters have failed to meet quotas for the last 4 to 5 months.

[BabyJesus]

Makes me glad I live in Canada.

I'm glad you live there too. Now lets hope you stay there. How annoying a comment.(To all of you that said you're glad you live anywhere but here)

This is a bad precident. I hope the judges that voted that in burn in hell. Pretty soon we will all be renting our homes from wal-mart and target because there won't be any land to buy.

[serion]

I only got to page 3 before rage overcame me, so sorry if this has already been said, but:

IT WAS THE FUCKING JUDICIAL BRANCH!

You can't blame Bush for this one, no matter what else he has or hasn't done. He did not select a majority of the supreme court justices, and as president he has not control over the court's decision.

So lay off Bush, bitch about your precious liberal justices on the SC.

[Rakael]

Precious liberal justices??

My friend I hate all of government, so why don't you go follow Bush and Rush straight into hell. I'll keep bitching about everything government.

Edit: Now it gets saucy lol.

[eatme]

I only got to page 3 before rage overcame me, so sorry if this has already been said, but:

IT WAS THE FUCKING JUDICIAL BRANCH!

You can't blame Bush for this one, no matter what else he has or hasn't done. He did not select a majority of the supreme court justices, and as president he has not control over the court's decision.

So lay off Bush, bitch about your precious liberal justices on the SC.

Okay, but what does that have to do with our troops in Afghanistan, huh!?

[Dirty Harry]

I'm glad you live there too. Now lets hope you stay there. How annoying a comment.(To all of you that said you're glad you live anywhere but here)

Yeah im glad too that alot of american assholes dont live in canada too, look at it this way, america is a roach motel attracting all the unwantables.

[Zanzibar]

Yea, before you start placing blame, look and see who did it first. This was a liberal innitiative, not a conservative one. This is big government at it's worst, and that is the liberal mentality.

Take the time and read the actual (http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/23jun20051201/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-108.pdf)
Supeme Court ruling, you will see that the Conservative judges make it very clear that this is a "Dangerous" ruling and precident.

As for those of you bitching about leaving the U.S. then please do so. We do not want or need you pansy crying asses here. Run away instead of fighting for your rights is the practice of cowards.

If you do not like this decision then make it known, write your Congressman, call them, call your newspaper or station. Do some research and get involved.

But sadly most of you all who are bitching will just sit back in your chair, pull up some porn or pop in another game while you rant about how bad and evil the U.S. is.

Sure, I'll chime in. Blanket blaming of 'liberals' always is a call to arms for me.

While on the surface it's scary, reading the decision carefully shows WHY they voted the way they did.

All this does is take the power away from the FEDERAL and JUDICIAL levels and put it on the CITY level, in the hands of LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS. Also, the justices made sure to include in their decision the fact that the states could pass additional laws to protect homeowners.

What this does is prevent a single homeowner (or small group of them) from stalling development that would help the community. I've got a house in an area that would be a great reservoir/school/other development project that would bring business locally. All my neighbors have agreed to sell their properties, but I want to cash in on this - I won't sell for anything less than $17 million.

Without this decision, the city is screwed. With this decision, the city has recourse. They can act to force me to sell, in order to help the rest of the community.

This is WHY we have local elected officials - to make decisions for the good of the community. If the city's actions are unjust/unwarranted, those officials will be penalized in the next election - they are held accountable for their actions. Many judges are appointed for life - what recourse do you have if one of those judges comes down against you? That's why this decision was made. Local elected officials are the best people to make these kinds of judgments.

[Bone]

Thanks for steering us back to the original topic, Zanzibar :)

For all the cynics, Zan's points about local politics are what give me hope. I was recently following a local fight in Austin to prevent a tennis organization from levelling an inner-city park to add more tennis courts. The tennis people live many miles away and claimed they would be helping to protect people from the scary, bad influences who hang out in the park (by walling up the tennis courts and making it private... wtf). The locals (the scary bad park people) fought it tooth and nail, coming up against corrupt city council members who were ignoring many of their valid arguments, but they eventually won and saved their only park area for miles.

[maniac_of_noise]

It makes me wonder why I even moved here in the first place. I should have stayed in England. I'm sorry Blighty, take me back!

[Wolfgang]

Please never allow people to comment on threads like this again.

I have never seen so much made up BS. Most of you speaking with "facts" are either terribly misinformed or are using hearsay.

If you are going to post a fact, use a source.

[Phades]

Please never allow people to comment on threads like this again.

I have never seen so much made up BS. Most of you speaking with "facts" are either terribly misinformed or are using hearsay.

If you are going to post a fact, use a source.

But that would unfortunately require the fact to be true rather than a convenient "pull it out of my ass" comment to support your position. On the internet, we don't do that. It's much less convenient and often times the actual facts don't support our argument.

Geesh, I thought everybody knew that.

Personally, I'm impressed and surprised how civil this has remained. I'm still waiting for the "oh yeah! You're Hitler!" comment that we all know signifies the winner.

[GrinR]

You do realize that America created Saddam don't you? What goes around comes around...

LOL ignorant idiot!

[vornskr]

I would have less of a problem with this ruling if it didn't involve private interests.

The result (which has been stated previously) is that the door is now open for corporations who have an alderman or magistrate etc. etc. in their pocket. Since local officials don't make the kind of financial or social bank that federal politicians do, it shouldn't be to hard to monetarily convince them that corporate interests are the same as community interests.

Then again, if people really pay attention to local elections, they can nip this problem in the bud by choosing representatives that represent them. I'm sure when New London's next municipal (or state) elections are held, the citizens will be paying close attention.

And for the record, comments from non-U.S posters along the line of "Glad I don't live there!" are really very rude and unnecessary. They detract from the overall intellectual clout of the topic. Besides, most Americans are glad they don't live in your country, because if they had wanted to, they would move there. Instead of the other way around.

edit: in response to GrinR quotey-comment~

Saddam created Saddam. A particular United States admistration did some business with him, feeling he was the lesser of two evils (the greater being Iran). Please do not over-simplify and place the blame on an entire country for the obscure actions of a single administration.

There, wasn't that better than "LOL ignorant idiot"?

[GrinR]

Bush's reelection proves that democracy in this country has finally failed. It's all down hill from here. I mean, you can talk about changing the country, and revolutionizing our political system... But honestly, it's much easier to jump ship.

LOL ignorant idiot #2!

[Intruder]

Wolfgang it may help, if you yourself cite sources of mis-information. :) I have seen links being thrown around like crazy in here. Lots of sources to be read.

As for America being a Roach Motel, yea, the country that brings in all people from all over the world, the country that is turned to when others need money or food or soldiers but then is spit on at the same time for being Global Police, the country that has led the way for suffrage and human rights, the country that provides protection for the entire North America, the country that allows any race, religion, or sex succeed if they have the drive, and the country that has the best Hockey teams is a piss poor rat trap of a roach motel. Yea, thats it, your 100% right.

You sir are a flamebaiting whelp of a man. You sully then memories of all the people who have lived and died for the U.S.

[Zanzibar]

I don't wanna get too deep into this because I'm sure it's really boring, but overall it's not the developer who goes looking for a city to build in; the city defines its needs, those needs are debated, planning commissions are created, etc. etc. This takes years, during which there are many meetings where local residents have their say.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susette_Kelo_et_al._v._City_of_New_London_et_al.

In this case, the town is a former whaling village that has been losing jobs and citizens for decades. After Pfizer started building a plant nearby, the local officials, in order to try and make the city attractive to new businesses and to cater to the newly-transplanted Pfizer employees, wanted to revamp their waterfront. Of 115 homeowners in the affected area, 100 agreed to sell in order to help the city.

There are 26,000 people living there. As you can guess, an influx of new revenue from new businesses and new home construction would help just about everyone in the community. Should 15 people have the right to prevent the other 25,985 from seeing the benefits?

Granted, I too am worried about the 'worst-case' scenario that could happen - where corrupt local politicans try to settle grudges or worse. But if the local citizens take an interest, then the chances of this happening 'too fast' for people to realize what's happening are slim, mostly because NOTHING gets done on a local level in less than a few years.

[GrinR]

The right to a gun has never been clearer. Armed resistance would be a symoblic action aginst ones home being 'stolen.' Of course this would only be twisted by the corporate news. Its more and more clear how corporations and goverment is fusing, out of greed and power to more control us. Dast ist shada.
vote nader!

LOL paranoid idiot!

[Intruder]

Zanzibar, just for instance what if one of those houses was a 120 year old house that had been in the same family for generations? Does the town have the right to destroy the lives of a family?

I understand the argument and how it might be used, but it VERY scary to think that a local govt. might have such power.

[Zanzibar]

Zanzibar, just for instance what if one of those houses was a 120 year old house that had been in the same family for generations? Does the town have the right to destroy the lives of a family?

I understand the argument and how it might be used, but it VERY scary to think that a local govt. might have such power.

Move the house. If it came down to that, if it was the difference of paying an extra $200,000 to have the house professionally moved to a new location in order to get the deal done, then they'd do it. But don't say 'My family's history is more important than the future of the community.' Future > History.

Part of living in a community is accepting that you're all in it together.

[GrinR]

"There, wasn't that better than "LOL ignorant idiot"?"

Of course it is. I already explained earlier - the folks who actually bother to educate themselves about a topic before they discuss it are telling me what I already know, and what's pretty easy to research (read: google) on your own. The others are the usual ignorant trash who rant about government conspiracy and "isms" and my personal favorite "FUCK BUSH".

To be clear: there is no point trying to educate those who are either too lazy or too in love with ignorance to make even the most cursory of efforts to educate themselves. It's a waste of time - so, for me, my more succinct posts suffice. 'sides, it's fun to tease the animals.

[Bone]

LOL ignorant idiot #2!

While you have really distinguished yourself as holding an intelligent opinion.

[camberiu]

the country that is turned to when others need money or food or soldiers but then is spit on at the same time for being Global Police, the country that has led the way for suffrage and human rights, the country that provides protection for the entire North America


I am sorry, but I have to disagree with you. The US has done very little "out of pure goodness" in the international arena. We got into WWI because of our interests. Same about WWII, or Korea or Vietnam. Did the US go fight in Europe when France felt to the Nazi? Nope, we only got involved years later, when Hitler actually declared war on us. Korea was for political reasons and so was Vietnam. Did we do anything in Rhuanda, where there was nothing political to gain? No. Are we doing anything in Sudan? no. Because we don't care about Sudan.

Also, before you spit on people from outside of the US, please remember that right after 09/11, Canada, France, Germany and many other nations put their forces at OUR disposal. On 09/12 the France's main newspaper, the "Le Monde" was all red white and blue and had the following headlines: "We Are All Americans Now", in reference tot the feeling that the French took the 09/11 attacks personally, as if they were also the victims. Everyone was on our side and ready to fight with us. Canada sent troops to Afghanistan (we bombed the canadian soldiers there, killing several) so did Germany and many other allies. But it only took Dubya and this ape like foreing policy and the injustifiable invasion of Iraq to alienate all of our friends. Worse, thanks to Dubya we have now joined the club of countries that torture and abuse its "enemies". So, froma country that was one of the icons of humans rights and the rule of law, we now share our reputation with countries like Syria, Iran, North Korea, China and Indonesia. Way to go indeed. I am sure the entire world now admires our feats in Abu Graib and Gitmo, and our "Patriot Act". What a role model we are.

[camberiu]

Move the house. If it came down to that, if it was the difference of paying an extra $200,000 to have the house professionally moved to a new location in order to get the deal done, then they'd do it. But don't say 'My family's history is more important than the future of the community.' Future > History.

Part of living in a community is accepting that you're all in it together.


I don't think Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin or Mao Tse Dong could have said it better. I am not even sure why we have an embargo against Cuba. That has been Castro's arguments all along.

[GrinR]

"Future > History" is exactly how the Taliban felt about those stupid Buddhist statues (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan).

There was a guy named Pol Pot who did an awsome bang-up job with "Future > History". Oh, and Orwell had a lot to say about the future.

1984 Pop quiz: anyone remember what Winston's crime was?

[Bone]

Good points there GrinR. Of course the Taliban weren't building public works that the statues stood in the way of- they were just offended by their existence.

Wasn't Winston's original crime simply using a diary to record his thoughts? A "thought crime"?

[Intruder]

Camberlu, please never again put words into my mouth.

I never said "out of pure goodness" as you imply that I did. There are always other motives. I never said that there weren't.

I never "spit" on other countries, I didn't even talk about other countries! I was only refering to the U.S. I have respect for all countries that deserve it.

So next time please get your hand outa my ass and talking through my lips like some ventrilaquist.

[camberiu]

"
There was a guy named Pol Pot who did an awsome bang-up job with "Future > History". Oh, and Orwell had a lot to say about the future.

1984 Pop quiz: anyone remember what Winston's crime was?


He had a diary, where we would write and record his history (instead of relying on the state's history).

[GrinR]

camberiu, I often wonder what the response would be if we broadcast the beheadings, the mutilation, the smoking pieces of civilians after a homicide bombing, the fine opinions of the "insurgents" about women and the bible ... on national TV. Every night on the news. I wonder what people would thing if we could see both the pyramid of prisoners at gitmo AND a man looking into the camera and screaming and gurgling as a "insurgent" sawed his head off with a dull knife. Want to take a look yourself? ***extreme warning*** Click HERE (http://www.ogrish.com/archives/war/index.html). I warn you, it's hard to not vomit. If you can stomach it, look at some of what is actually going on and what our enemies are like, and then look at the gitmo pics again. Doesn't make it right, but does put it in perspective.

oh, I also wonder where the hand-wringing civil rights people are going to be when the next 9/11 happens. Not if, when.

[GrinR]

He had a diary, where we would write and record his history (instead of relying on the state's history).

It made me sad to see someone who is obviously intelligent post the larger post you wrote before the one that echoed my future>history response. Yes, your answer is mostly correct. It's usually a question that stumps most leftists because they are too swept up in righteous indignation to bother reading.

Memory was Winston's crime. Not just chronicling history, but even having a memory of his existence at all.

[Bone]

How has anything our current administration done prevented the next 9/11? In fact, our policies have bred nothing but more hate against our country. The USA was found to be less popular than China... Communist China!... in recent polls.

Yes, we need to be fighting the war on terror. But this war needs to also address the policies that we (Republicans and Democrats alike) put in place, which are the roots of the hatred that spawns terrorism.

[vornskr]

I am not even sure why we have an embargo against Cuba.

Because it's a communist state and the embargo was forged decades ago in the cold war era.

Many people don't know why we still have an embargo, but it's because there is a large (and politically powerful) anti-Castro Cuban demographic in southern Florida (where I live) that wants to keep the embargo alive in order to keep the United States from doing business with a regime they despise.

Personally, as the son of a Cuban immigrant, I feel this logic is flawwed, as it will not serve to change the regime itself. Nor does it help the people of Cuba, who suffer under Castro and those who serve in the upper echelons of the party. Keeping strong capitalist influences out of the country won't exactly help to renovate the communist/totalitarian institution.

As long as this view is maintained by the "anti-Castro" demographic however, politicians (and administrations) will cater to it and keep the embargo alive.

Obligatory facts to be linked (http://www.freetrade.org/issues/cuba.html)

My apologies on the derailment. Please carry on.

[camberiu]

camberiu, I often wonder what the response would be if we broadcast the beheadings, the mutilation, the smoking pieces of civilians after a homicide bombing, the fine opinions of the "insurgents" about women and the bible ... on national TV.

Are you saying that because they are mean, we should be too? The Nazi's were pretty bad and so were the imperial japanese. Did we need to torture them, sexualy humiliate them, to win? Or did we do it without having to dehumanize ourselves? If you follow this URL(http://www.essentialliberties.com/archives/000901.php), you will see a list of 12 US Generals who public denouce the acts of torture being practiced by the US military. These are not hippies, lefties or guys from human rights watch. There are US GENERALS, many of them who saw combat, and that are ASHAMED on the way we are treating our prisioners. What do you tell them?

[Zanzibar]

I don't think Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin or Mao Tse Dong could have said it better. I am not even sure why we have an embargo against Cuba. That has been Castro's arguments all along.

So, you're comparing local officials of New London to Pol Pot and Castro?

Didn't Dick Durbin just get raked over the coals for something similar?

Oh, right, sorry, right-wing 'patriots' get to live by different rules. I keep forgetting that.

[Bone]

Geneva Convention? I never HEARD OF IT!!!

[Intruder]

The Nazi's were pretty bad and so were the imperial japanese... PRETTY BAD??? You are comparing the limited instances of what a FEW soldiers and leaders have done to the Nazis???? Yes what happened is wrong, but to compare our actions with those of such regimes is unbelievable.

Ohh and you can bet that those nation's who "hate" us, still invest in our stockmarkets and take our federal funds and assistance.

[Rakael]

Yes Intruder, and I will back him up. The Nazi's didn't start out with wholesale slaughter of millions, they built up to it. All the while they were feeding the populace propoganda to such an extent that most didn't know the horrors of the camps.

[GrinR]

"Are you saying that because they are mean, we should be too?"

No, of course not. It's deplorable that we are torturing prisoners. It is also being discussed, investigated, reviewed, and prosecuted. We're handling it as a democracy does - not perfect by a longshot, but far better than anything else.

My point (which I clarified in my edit) was that it doesn't just distract from the important things, it diminishes them. To be even more pointed - nobody will give a rat's ass about gitmo torture, or even outright torturing to -death- of prisoners, if the enemy succeeds in another 9/11 type attack. All it takes is one dirty bomb in Baltimore and Americans will eagerly agree to do "whatever it takes" to rid the world of "the enemy". I don't think anti-war people understand the stakes, and I think focusing on frankly little things like torture is a terrible mistake.

[vornskr]

How has anything our current administration done prevented the next 9/11? In fact, our policies have bred nothing but more hate against our country. The USA was found to be less popular than China... Communist China!... in recent polls.

Yes, we need to be fighting the war on terror. But this war needs to also address the policies that we (Republicans and Democrats alike) put in place, which are the roots of the hatred that spawns terrorism.


Bone, I would like to point out that should anything have been done to prevent terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, the general public would likely not be privy to that information. The covert branches of the government that work to intercept these hostile acts often keep their activities as secret as possible. This is why the only news we hear of their actions is usually bad, catastrophically un-silencable, failures.

Furthermore I would like to state the obvious: polls are bullshit.

And the roots of hatred that spawns most fundamentalist Islamic terrorism against the United States is the backing we give to harsh, totalitarian regimes the common people must live under (I'm looking at you Saudi Arabia) and our unwavering support for Israel. Whether or not we didn't sign the Kyoto Accords, renew the Patriot Act, or allow euthinasia to be practiced doesn't really matter to the common muslim, nor should they.

[camberiu]

PRETTY BAD??? You are comparing the limited instances of what a FEW soldiers and leaders have done to the Nazis????


Yes I am. If a leader is willing to violate the Geneva Convention and allow for some enemies, he very likely would be willing to the same to ALL of his opponents if he could get away with it. The only difference between a Rumsfeld and a Himmler is that FOR NOW, Rumsfeld can get away with a lot less. It is just a difference of scope.


"We had the moral right, we had the duty to our people, to destroy the people which wanted to destroy us. Altogether, however, we can say that we have fulfilled this most difficult duty for the love of our people. And our spirit, our soul, our character has not suffered injury from it."
--Himmler

[Zanzibar]

PRETTY BAD??? You are comparing the limited instances of what a FEW soldiers and leaders have done to the Nazis???? Yes what happened is wrong, but to compare our actions with those of such regimes is unbelievable.

Ohh and you can bet that those nation's who "hate" us, still invest in our stockmarkets and take our federal funds and assistance.

No, I think you missed his point. I believe he was speaking about the way we TREATED the Nazi and Japanese POWs, even knowing what we knew about the Holocaust and the Bataan Death March - we didn't have to torture them. But, in the name of attempting to get 'information' about possible terror attacks, we are doing just that in Gitmo.

In all, we are under the microscope. If we're going to win the War on Terror, then we need to EXCEED the Geneva Conventions in order to prove to the world - and particularly the Middle East - that we are not trying to start another Crusade.

I don't think the Gitmo detainees are good people. It's not them I'm worried about. It's the perception that we are mistreating Muslims and their religion that scares the hell outta me.

[Rakael]

I am actually horrified by the thought of another 9-11 style attack. Not only for the lives that will be lost, but for the power it will give the government as a whole. I should say, the power the government will take by stripping us of even more rights. The Patriot Act, which was first conceived years ago (I will look that up later, but am at work and have to keep things breif), was only the first in what I feel will be a long line of rights restrictions. Also, do not expect to get those rights back. Governments do not like to give up power as a general rule.

[Intruder]

I am in shock, I truely am.

No Zanzibar. He ment exactly what he said. Look above your post.

[Kefkataran]

I am in shock, I truely am.

I think the point they're making is more than a little ridiculous, but I'm not surprised. I hear this point reiterated by extremist anti-extremists all the time. Note the paradoxical inconsistency. They never do.

[Rakael]

Intruder, please don't be under any illusions that this government and country couldn't possibly become as bad as Nazi Germany. It easily could. I am by no means saying we are anywhere close now, nor that it even will happen, only that it can.

[vornskr]

camberiu, you assumption of the moral character of a person you've never met is annoying at best.

Cute quote from Himmler, and not suprising you keep it on hand. Do keep in mind the Jews were used as a scapegoat. Rather than trying to actually harm greater Germany, they served in the previous war as loyal soldiers and generals, and their banks bled just as bad as gentile banks did in the repairations Germany was forced to pay.

Meanwhile fundamentalist Islamists have already succeeded in killing thousands of civilians, disrupting national trade and spreading fear throughout the country.

You conclusions are illogically drawn. You are wrong, sir. Please exit the building and watch for the door.

[GrinR]

"It's the perception that we are mistreating Muslims and their religion that scares the hell outta me."

Really interesting. Is it the perception or the reality that's a problem? Because we could be angel-saints and it's not going to do a single thing to change the schooling of Islamic Fascism. It would be like Jews in the 1930's telling each other, as I'm certain they did, "we must be good, noble, not rat-like and stingy as they depict us, and better than average! Then the Nazis will leave us alone!" They were wrong - and so are the moral relativists who urge the same attitide.

[falak]

All it takes is one dirty bomb blah blah blahYUO FAIL IT! Dirty bombs, besides being explosive, do not present any more of a threat than... well, your average bomb.

Don't berate me, I'm just pointing out a fact.

[Zanzibar]

No Zanzibar. He ment exactly what he said. Look above your post.

Well, what he said was:

Are you saying that because they are mean, we should be too? The Nazi's were pretty bad and so were the imperial japanese. Did we need to torture them, sexualy humiliate them, to win? Or did we do it without having to dehumanize ourselves?

If he's making another point in response, then that's fine, but I agree with him on this one. We didn't have to 'extract revenge' on the POWs on WWII. And we shouldn't now for 9/11, PARTICULARLY if we're trying to convince the world that we are 'right and just'.

It will NEVER be 'right and just' to torture. You will not be able to tell the Muslim world that 'we mistreated these people because they deserved it.'

[serion]

Are you saying that because they are mean, we should be too? The Nazi's were pretty bad and so were the imperial japanese. Did we need to torture them, sexualy humiliate them, to win? Or did we do it without having to dehumanize ourselves? If you follow this URL(http://www.essentialliberties.com/archives/000901.php), you will see a list of 12 US Generals who public denouce the acts of torture being practiced by the US military. These are not hippies, lefties or guys from human rights watch. There are US GENERALS, many of them who saw combat, and that are ASHAMED on the way we are treating our prisioners. What do you tell them?

Torture?? I see that word tossed around, but has anyone stopped to think about it? Is torture just making someone uncomfortable? In that case, whoever designed the desks for my school is a heinous criminal.

Lets say torture=physical damage, intense agony, or bringing someone close to death (holding them underwater and suchlike)

There is none of that at Gitmo. Discomfort, yes. Humiliation, yes. Thats bullying, not torture.

Screaming "OMG torture!!!1!1!1one!!!" Accomplishes nothing. Neither does "OMG Bush=hitler/stalin/insert evil dictator of your choice here"

Stop the hyperbole and try to be one tiny bit reasonable.

[Rakael]

One more quick point/question:

Do you think the Germans as a whole thought that Hitler and his men were evil when the Nazi's came into power? Even after they had been in power for years, most viewed them as saviours.

Propaganda works wonders.

[camberiu]

camberiu, you assumption of the moral character of a person you've never met is annoying at best.


Have you ever met Hitler, Stalin Ted Bundy or Saddam Hussein? Does that mean that you cannot make assumptions about their character then? Is that what you are saying? The secretary of defense REFUSED to give Geneva Convention protections to the prisioners even when many of HIS GENERALS begged him to do so. He swore to us, on LIVE TV that the knew where the WMDs were:

"We KNOW where they(WMDs) are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
--Rumsfeld on Sunday, March 30, 2003 - 11:30 A.M. EST ABC Network

So yes, I do make assumptions about his character.

[Bone]

The covert branches of the government that work to intercept these hostile acts often keep their activities as secret as possible. This is why the only news we hear of their actions is usually bad, catastrophically un-silencable, failures.
True, the best efforts will go unnoticed: buildings that didn't fall. I guess I was referring to our perceived image in the world. Maybe it's as simple as hiring a better PR team for our administration, but they come off as arrogant, ignorant, and above reproach.

Furthermore I would like to state the obvious: polls are bullshit.
Some are. This one was taken with samples of around 1000 people in a number of countries. In fact this article says much better some of the things I've been pointing out- that while we may be fighting for the right reasons, the way we go about things makes us shoot ourselves in the foot.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8324290/


And the roots of hatred that spawns most fundamentalist Islamic terrorism against the United States is the backing we give to harsh, totalitarian regimes the common people must live under (I'm looking at you Saudi Arabia) and our unwavering support for Israel. Whether or not we didn't sign the Kyoto Accords, renew the Patriot Act, or allow euthinasia to be practiced doesn't really matter to the common muslim, nor should they.

I agree completely. Supporting Israel and Saudi for this long, we have a long line of presidents (of both parties) who have directly led to the harvest we reap today. That, and our support of Iran and Iraq at different times, our propping up of various evil dictators around the world and our many secret operations and sponsored coups to secure oil (the coup in Venezuela (http://www.arena.org.nz/ven0warn.htm) comes to mind)

[GrinR]

YUO FAIL IT! Dirty bombs, besides being explosive, do not present any more of a threat than... well, your average bomb.

Don't berate me, I'm just pointing out a fact.

More facts:
Dirty bombs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb):
The term dirty bomb is most often used to refer to a Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD), a radiological weapon which combines radioactive material with conventional explosives.

Because a terrorist dirty bomb is likely to cause few deaths, many do not consider one to be a weapon of mass destruction. Its purpose would presumably be to create psychological, not physical, harm through mass panic and terror. Additionally, decontamination of the affected area might require considerable time and expense, rendering affected areas unusable, and causing extensive economic damage.

--------------------------------------

Considering the hang-wringing and moaning about asbestos and pulverized concrete inhalation in Manhattan (and subsequent lawsuits), I think it's safe to say that nobody will be living in an area that's been hit with a dirty bomb. Imagine Manhattan island devoid of human life... yeah. Not good.

That said, point taken.

[Zanzibar]

"It's the perception that we are mistreating Muslims and their religion that scares the hell outta me."

Really interesting. Is it the perception or the reality that's a problem? Because we could be angel-saints and it's not going to do a single thing to change the schooling of Islamic Fascism. It would be like Jews in the 1930's telling each other, as I'm certain they did, "we must be good, noble, not rat-like and stingy as they depict us, and better than average! Then the Nazis will leave us alone!" They were wrong - and so are the moral relativists who urge the same attitide.

This is a little different. We were attacked on 9/11 in the name of Islam. (Yes, I am well aware that ALL of Islam didn't attack us, but the Islamic countries were evenly split on whether they thought it was a good or bad thing.) As such, we need to tread a VERY CAREFUL path so that it's very clear that we are not fighting against Islam itself.

Attacking the Quran is a sin against ALL of Islam. It shows disrespect not for the detainee who you're in front of, but disrespect for the religion itself. In a similar fashion, preventing a Muslim from praying isn't punishing the man, it's disrespecting the religion. Do you see that?

The main question is, should you care? I say YES YOU SHOULD. It's important that we are hyper-vigilant in how we treat Islam.

If Muslims - even MODERATE Muslims - see us disrespecting ISLAM ITSELF, that will not help. At one time, we looked on France as a valued ally. Notice how years of differences now drop our opinion of them where most of us would go to war with them if we had the chance. The same thing happens to us and Islamic people - everytime we disrespect Islam, they feel we are disrespecting THEM.

[camberiu]

Torture?? I see that word tossed around, but has anyone stopped to think about it? Is torture just making someone uncomfortable? In that case, whoever designed the desks for my school is a heinous criminal.



Well, severl generals who fought on wars (unlike you) disagree. And not just the generals, but the FBI too (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14936-2004Dec20.html). So does the Red Cross and others. Thank you.

[Intruder]

Unfortunately, no matter how nice we play, or what kind of kid gloves we have when dealing with these terrorists, there will alwyas be that section of Muslims that HATE Americans and the U.S. Why, decause they have been raised on it. When you see the pictures of the small children or girls wearing Suicide Vests, how can you not see that those who raise them to do that are the EVIL ones, not us? They are the ones that would afford you no comforts, instead would give you a dull blade raked across your trhoat or stomach as you slowly and die, not us!!!!

[falak]

Its purpose would presumably be to create psychological, not physical, harm through mass panic and terror.Good point.

[camberiu]

When you see the pictures of the small children or girls wearing Suicide Vests, how can you not see that they are the EVIL ones, not us?


Funny because many of those terrorist use the EXACT same argument to justify themselves and their actions. They mention examples like when the US bombed a shelter full of women and children in Bagda in 1991 (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5422.htm) to show that WE are the evil ones, not them.

[GrinR]

This is a little different. We were attacked on 9/11 in the name of Islam. (Yes, I am well aware that ALL of Islam didn't attack us, but the Islamic countries were evenly split on whether they thought it was a good or bad thing.) As such, we need to tread a VERY CAREFUL path so that it's very clear that we are not fighting against Islam itself.

The main question is, should you care? I say YES YOU SHOULD. It's important that we are hyper-vigilant in how we treat Islam.

I'll start caring a lot more when the supposed "majority" of muslims start caring about their own kind. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the owner of a mad dog when the dog tears their own kid to pieces and has to be put down. They know who they're in bed with, and choose to ignore the fact that they're sleeping with the enemy. I'm less inclined to listen to their complaints when we wake them up by kicking in the door and taking the enemy away.

[falak]

Intruder, whether or not terrorists will offer "comforts" is not the point. You, as a free nation, are supposed to take the higher ground and stand above that kind of rationale.

I've already got too involved in this discussion.

[Intruder]

Zanzibar, at Git-mo we give them the Quran, we give them a compass pointing the way to Mecca, we give them traditional meals. What did they give us, ohh yea 3000 dead innocents. Obviously not all people of Muslim faith are bad, just like any people there are good and bad. If they are put in stressful situations and info comes out of it that saves lives, then so be it. GREAT even! I do not support the torture and killing of people for such methods. But discomfort and cohersion, our troops on the ground face worse than that every day.

[Zanzibar]

I'll start caring a lot more when the supposed "majority" of muslims start caring about their own kind. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the owner of a mad dog when the dog tears their own kid to pieces and has to be put down. They know who they're in bed with, and choose to ignore the fact that they're sleeping with the enemy. I'm less inclined to listen to their complaints when we wake them up by kicking in the door and taking the enemy away.

So...by this reasoning, all of the Muslim world is guilty, right? So we ARE gonna go on another Crusade?

If you listen to some of the Neocons, there are 'enemies' right here. I proudly wear my badge as one of the 'enemy.' And I'll continue doing so as long as people continue to NOT THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE.

[GrinR]

Funny because many of those terrorist use the EXACT same argument to justify themselves and their actions. They mention examples like when the US bombed a shelter full of women and children in Bagda in 1991 (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5422.htm) to show that WE are the evil ones, not them.

More interesting (and less hair-pulling) reading on this HERE (http://www.globaled.org/curriculum/cm20a.html).

Ultimately, though, I don't think the justifications matter as much as the results. In war, there are deaths. The real challenge is not having wars, not trying to explain the particulars of the results of them. Is it better to lose 3000 civilians, or 1700 troops? Is it better to torture 100 men, or run a bombing campaign that kills 20,000 civilians? It it better to accept the suffering and tyranny of millions, or accept that tens or hundreds of thousands of them will have to die for the rest to be free?

I don't have the answers, but I do have my personal decisions in this regard.

[Bone]

So...by this reasoning, all of the Muslim world is guilty, right? So we ARE gonna go on another Crusade?


I agree. If we really are going to fight a holy war, let's not beat around the bush. Let's announce it publicly and see how the US citizens react.

In reality, Islamic Wahabiism (which was created in Saudi Arabia, where the 9/11 terrorists all hailed from) is a small percentage of Islam, which is actually a religion that denounces violence, even against the "infidel". That religion has been hijacked by fundamentalists just as Christianity has been in this country, used as a tool and a weapon instead of an instrument of peace.

So, the answer is no, we shouldn't treat the Quran with such disrespect. It's the crime we need to fight, not the religion.

[Zanzibar]

Zanzibar, at Git-mo we give them the Quran, we give them a compass pointing the way to Mecca, we give them traditional meals. What did they give us, ohh yea 3000 dead innocents. Obviously not all people of Muslim faith are bad, just like any people there are good and bad. If they are put in stressful situations and info comes out of it that saves lives, then so be it. GREAT even! I do not support the torture and killing of people for such methods. But discomfort and cohersion, our troops on the ground face worse than that every day.

I'm not saying 'don't stop attacking Terror.' I'm saying 'Be careful while you're doing it that you take every opportunity - and then some - to make sure that we're doing everything we can to build trust instead of breaking it.'

We really can't be cavalier about our attitudes towards Islam. There are people who feel that an attack on a Muslim is an attack on Islam itself. And the 'Who cares what they think, we need to protect ourselves' really works well in the short-term, but the long-term effects, as we're seeing now in Iraq, can be disastrous.

[camberiu]

But discomfort and cohersion, our troops on the ground face worse than that every day.

So, according to your logic, tactics employed by the japanese during WWII like the forced marches, very hot rooms, dripping water on your head for days were not torture, just disconfort, right?

Also, when during the Gulf War, when the Iraqis put downed US aviators to make anti-US speeches on TV, we had no reason to denouce that right? Why were we bitching about the Geneva convention? Our troops ont he ground face alot worse. So, in the future, some enemy does the same to captured american solders, we are not going to complain, right? It is just disconfort and cohersion, no biggie.

[GrinR]

So...by this reasoning, all of the Muslim world is guilty, right?

Yes. Exactly as guilty as the non-muslims who turn a blind eye to the intense and deliberate suffering the Islamic fascists bring to every place they infest. The same people who thought/think that things were better in Iraq when Saddam was there because they...

continue to NOT THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE.

[Intruder]

I ask any to answer this simple questions with a one-word response and only one word.
I am curious to see the results.

Who is to blame for terrorism. Terrorists or the U.S.?

BTW have you all noticed how off-track we have gotten :D
Also don't take any of this personally. I do not mean harm or as a personal attack. I still love you all :) And if you yourself are a terrorist reading this, I am sure you are a good person on the inside.

[GrinR]

So, according to your logic, tactics employed by the japanese during WWII like the forced marches, very hot rooms, dripping water on your head for days were not torture, just disconfort, right? Also, when during the Gulf War, when the Iraqis put downed US aviators to make anti-US speeches on TV, we had no reason to denouce that right? Why were we bitching about the Geneva convention? Our troops ont he ground face alot worse. So, in the future, some enemy does the same to captured american solders, we are not going to complain, right? It is just disconfort and cohersion, no biggie.

Torture is torture. We can leave it to the paper-pushers to figure out the legal distinctions, but ultimately anyone who has been captured by the enemy knows exactly how much pull they have citing the Geneva Convention. Speaking of which, when our enemies saw someone's head off, or use infants as sheilds from sniper-fire, where do we file our GC complaint? Oh, and when we do that - how are those who spit on the treaty going to be punished? By whom?

I'm not sure about this (fact check on Aisle GrinR!) but I believe the GC doesn't apply to you if you don't follow it's parameters.

[GrinR]

Who is to blame for terrorism. Terrorists or the U.S.?\

Power-hungry tyrants, just like it always has been. Terrorism is a tactic they use, and frankly I think the 9/11 attack was more of a successful military attack than a terrorist one, but who's counting? (shit, I am...)

[falak]

Who is to blame for terrorism. Terrorists or the U.S.? No-one is to blame for terrorism. Terrorism is just acts or threats of violence by a group to reach a specific goal. Do you have a specific group/event in mind?

[camberiu]

I'm not sure about this (fact check on Aisle GrinR!) but I believe the GC doesn't apply to you if you don't follow it's parameters.

That is not true. The Japanese and Germans did NOT follow the Geneva Convention and were still treated according tot he convention. The Iraqi Army did NOT follow the Geneva Convention and were treated as defined by the convention during Gulf War I.

[Rakael]

I'm not sure about this (fact check on Aisle GrinR!) but I believe the GC doesn't apply to you if you don't follow it's parameters.

Not positive, but I think thats right.

[Intruder]

So, according to your logic, tactics employed by the japanese during WWII like the forced marches, very hot rooms, dripping water on your head for days were not torture, just disconfort, right?

Also, when during the Gulf War, when the Iraqis put downed US aviators to make anti-US speeches on TV, we had no reason to denouce that right? Why were we bitching about the Geneva convention? Our troops ont he ground face alot worse. So, in the future, some enemy does the same to captured american solders, we are not going to complain, right? It is just disconfort and cohersion, no biggie.

I understand where you are coming from except on those marches, they murdered any who couldnt keep up and some just for sport, the hot rooms often ended as a mass grave, and water tortures drove people mad.

But if you cannot see the difference between what they do and what we do, then what can I say. I respect your opinion, I don't agree with it and it doesn't mean your wrong. And I'm not gonna change your mind.

However at the end of the day I worry more about the civilized world who have to live with these terrorists, more than I worry about if these said terrorists are comfortable in their cell where they wont be blowing people up.

[Zanzibar]

I ask any to answer this simple questions with a one-word response and only one word.
I am curious to see the results.

Who is to blame for terrorism. Terrorists or the U.S.?

Terrorists.

But I have something else to say.

Something I've noticed - I visit a lot of message boards - is that those who support the right-wing agenda always want to boil down complex issues into a one-idea answer. They really, really enjoy fitting multifaceted ideas into simple black-and-white terms. Even if important distinctions are lost, even if some gray-area would bring relief, it's nowhere near as important as making sure that it's an up-or-down solution.

And here we are. Thanks Intruder.

I'd like to think that we could evolve beyond that. But the last election made me think we're regressing.

'You're either with us or against us.'
'If you want Terri Schiavo to die, you're a murderer.'
'If you vote against this military bill, you are against the war.'

...I can think of a million more.

[Bone]

I'm not sure about this (fact check on Aisle GrinR!) but I believe the GC doesn't apply to you if you don't follow it's parameters.

Not sure about that either, but I'm pretty sure that's not true. We're required to "be the bigger man" and not torture people. Maybe a country can have their GC rights revoked, I don't know.

However, we get around that in the war on terror based on a loophole in the GC: terrorists who do not wear a uniform of a country are technically "unlawful combatants" and therefore our treatment of them does not fall under the Geneva Convention or apparently any other standard of decency.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/iraq/genevaconventions.html

The problem with that is, without trial, representation or even being charged with a crime, there are already people in "Gitmo" whose crimes are unknown to anyone. This, to me, is dangerous. I'd rather see them charged with crimes so we can be sure that each detainee is in fact a terrorist (which I'm sure 95% are... but it's best to be sure if you're going to do this sort of thing, right?).

[camberiu]

No-one is to blame for terrorism. Terrorism is just acts or threats of violence by a group to reach a specific goal. Do you have a specific group/event in mind?


EXACTLY!!! Terrorsim is a TACTIC, a METHOD. That is why the term "War On Terror", used so much by this administration, is so stupid. It is like saying "War on the Blitzkrieg" or "War On Carpet Bombing". There is no such thing as "War On Terror". There is a war on a poorly funded rag tag group of muslim fundamentalysts who have NO HOPE of dealing a severe blow into the USA. It took them millions of dollars, YEARS of planning and complete surprise to kill 3000 Americans (50K americans die per year on car crashes). Yet, we are willing to sink 300 billion dollars, give up our freedoms, practice torture and alienate all of our allies in order to fight those guys using the dumbest tactics imaginable.

[vornskr]

on a side note:

Any time you compare modern events, wars, attrocities, or anything else you don't like to the horrors of the past, you automatically fail.

World view, cultural acceptence, moralities are all relative to their place in time. Furthermore, the root causes and effects of the crimes of the past are wholly different than those of the present. Just because two events at different places in time are both considered abhorrent acts, does not give you reasonable justification to compare them.

Douglas Adams said it best: Not all opinions are created equal.

Don't be a troll.

edit:

There is a war on a poorly funded rag tag group of muslim fundamentalysts who have NO HOPE of dealing a severe blow into the USA.

You sir, clearly, have no idea what Al'Qaeda is. Do you even know what it means?

[mister_slim]

I'm not bothering to read the whole thread, but I think people are getting too wrapped up in the Democrat/Republican false dichotomy. The point of the Supreme Court is that they are made up of seven people chosen for their legal knowledge and their ability to reason through problems well. They are by no means infallible (see Dred Scott, for example). The ease with which everyone divides them into liberal/conservative demonstrates how having only two parties encourages black and white categorization.
Everyone must read Jennifer Government. It is a good satire as to what corporate America might turn into.
Great book. I intend to be Mr. Apple-Nintendo, somehow.

[Intruder]

Zanzibar that is low. I though you above that. I simply was wondering when is was put to simple terms what people though. Have you even read all of these posts? How can you accuse me of boiling everything down to simplton form from one single post. You sir, I expected more from.

On unrelated notes, I think Terry should have been dead along time ago, govt had no buisness there.

I think gays should be allowed to marry.

I could keep on going, but please ask before you clump me in with a politcal group next time.

[Zanzibar]

Well, I do apologize if I offended you. But the implication is that this fault lies with one or the other, without taking into account the millions of variables.

Example: Anyone who wants to say 'The United States supported Israel, which begat bad feelings with the Palestinians, which caused sympathy in the Islamic world, which allowed OBL to get funding, who then carried out 9/11' would say -in your example - 'US.' That would open them up to any right-winger to say 'US? Are you INSANE? I suppose you think we should give up our democracy just because they hate us!!'

Do you see my point? There's a million ways that this should NOT be boiled down to a simple answer.

[Rakael]

Damnit, I have to go home now, then out to eat. This is just too much fun, and I have been keeping up with it since this morning.

Its been fun guys.

[Zanzibar]

And Intruder, I do know that you're not solidly in the right-wing camp. I'm afraid I just 'generalized' in the same way that I preached that people shouldn't. Sorry about that.

[Intruder]

I understand that, but I made it clear after my many lengthy posts, that that one in particular was just for fun and out of curiousity. It by no means meant that I only think in B/W terms. It was ment like one of those Soda tasting quizes, which is better Coke or Pepsi. I say Coke. :D

No worries Zanzibar, I am just glad we are having an intelligent and civil discourse reguarding a highly volatile subject. Also I know I can say some knee-jerk reactions but after a while of hearing your friend tell you about how almost everyday he had one terrorist or another attacking and killing his men, he himself has a multitude of scars now, I have become a bit jaded. I realize this.

Later RakEAL, been fun.

[camberiu]

You sir, clearly, have no idea what Al'Qaeda is. Do you even know what it means?


It means THE BASE. Do you REALLY think the Al'Qaeda could destroy us? What can they do? They can AT MOST kill some americans here and there. Could they kill 1000, 2000, even 100,000 Americans? Maybe, if they tried REALLY HARD and were REALLY LUCKY. Would that DESTROY the USA? Would that bring us to our knees? Very unlikely. No matter what they have, we are the most powerful nation in the world. We spend more on defense than the other 10 top spenders COMBINED. Teh Al'Qaeda is AT MOST a flea on the back of an elephant. In a pure strategic sense 9/11 was NOTHING. Of course I do not want to minimize the 3000 people who died. It must be a terrible pain to lose a loveld one like that. But in a PURE stategic/military sense, the loss of 9/11 was insignificant. The true impact was psychological. It made us scared and hysterical. That was its strategic brilliance. It made us give up our freedoms, to invade a country who posed no threat to us and create a worldwide PR nightmare, while making billions of muslims hate us. We are playing into his (Bin Ladden's) strategy by acting the way we are. He had NO HOPE of delivering a fatal blow to the US, but now he has dragged us to the Middle East, he is making us bleed BILLIONS OF DOLLARS that WE DO NOT HAVE on a crazy war, ruining our morale, etc....

I don't know if he is a genius or if our leader are stupid. Maybe a little of both. But right now he has the upper hand. We are playing HIS game and we will continue to do so until we change our whole attitude.

[Intruder]

If by chance Al'Qaeda got a portable nuke (of the many Russia has not accounted for) into New York City and detonated it, the results would be catastrophic on an unimaginable scale. If the Stock Exchange was shut down the World implications are staggering. The amount of life lost even if on a small scale would be horrible. The morale crush would be heartwrenching.

Now if they can do this is debateable, but the sad fact is 9-11 happened, and wether it was a success or not, the fact that it happened is enough for me.

You realize as well that they targeted our leaders right? It was a blow supposed to cripple us, however it failed on that end. They targeted the pentagon and possibly the White House or Congress.

That was a strategic move not simply a statement. They hoped to behead our government.

Could you imagine if the Pentagon would have been destroyed or if the White house was leveled? Even worse the Pres or Congress were killed? There would have been rather scary implications.

[Ancilar]

Jesus, guys, this has been a fantastic read.

I just wanted to give kudos to everyone involved in this civil (on the internet no less!) debate.

Keep up the good work!

[GrinR]

"Teh Al'Qaeda is AT MOST a flea on the back of an elephant. In a pure strategic sense 9/11 was NOTHING. "

I take back what I said about you being intelligent. *sigh*

[Bone]

Actually, destroying the World Trade Center was a strategic victory, and a financial disaster for the US. But I agree with some of your ideas about psychological impact. We have given up a lot of freedom and compromised a great deal of our founding ideals because of hysteria. We also pulled some of our bases out of Saudi Arabia; our occupation there was one of the few concrete beefs that Osama had with us. In that sense, did he win?

[Zanzibar]

Yeah, at the risk of getting COMPLETELY flamed, ask yourself this question:

'How could things be going BETTER for the Terrorists?'

Yes, you heard me right.

OBL wanted a US war in the Middle East, where every US misstep reverberates throughout the Muslim world. We're fighting a war in which the enemies look JUST LIKE the civilians, in a civilian zone. Every time a civilian dies, the families don't blame the faceless terrorists, they blame the REASON why the terrorists are IN IRAQ - the US. We've killed tens of thousands of civilians in our initial campaign, breeding angry families who will seek revenge against the Americans. We're the laughingstock of the world, we've been proved to lie about our reasons for going INTO Iraq, leaving Muslims wondering 'Are they really there after the oil?' Not only that, but we've CREATED A CALIFORNIA-SIZED TERRORIST TRAINING PLAYGROUND in Iraq that was not there before. We've solidified anti-US sentiment in the Middle East for DECADES TO COME.

Right now, OBL is sitting in a cave somewhere saying 'Mission Accomplished.'

[Intruder]

Everyone seems to forget the rumblings of democracy now being heard in the Middle East. If those fledgling democracies start to come about I would call that a MAJOR defeat for those Terrorists who still think women should just lie back and shut up and occasionally wear a Bomb Vest.

[Zanzibar]

Everyone seems to forget the rumblings of democracy now being heard in the Middle East. If those fledgling democracies start to come about I would call that a MAJOR defeat for those Terrorists who still think women should just lie back and shut up and occasionally wear a Bomb Vest.

Well. Being that the theocratics will win - you know, the guys who run Iran - I'm not sure it will be a step up. In place of Saddam, we will have a hardline Islamic radical group running the show.

[camberiu]

Could you imagine if the Pentagon would have been destroyed or if the White house was leveled? Even worse the Pres or Congress were killed? There would have been rather scary implications.


But the fact is that, even with the full element of surprise and year of planning, they could not do it. That should show you how amazingly difficult proposition this is. I am not saying that the US should sit back and do nothing. What I am saying is that we should have answered this attack as a supoer power, no as a bunch of hysterical frightened babies. Yes, we were attacked and Bin Laden should be hunted down and killed. But our reaction was to throw away our Constitution, to alienate our allies, to invade Iraq and ignore all our principles of justice and decency. Even when the Soviets had THOUSANDS of nukes pointed at us we did not do that. Why do that now? How likely it is that OBL will be able to smuggle a nuke into the USA? Those things are not easy to hide. They emit radiation and are build to be detonated hundred of yards above ground to have the desired effect.

I think we as a country should react to this attack in a rational manner, not like frightened spoiled rich people like we have. This is supposed to be THE HOME OF THE BRAVE, for crying out loud.

[falak]

Well. Being that the theocratics will win - you know, the guys who run Iran - I'm not sure it will be a step up. In place of Saddam, we will have a hardline Islamic radical group running the show.I don't know if this will happen or not, but if it does it could signal the end of pre-emptive strikes and the straussian philosophy that typically governs such decisions.

[Intruder]

How likely was it that they could hijack 4 different planes at the exact same time and hit 3 out of 4 targets? It happened, I do not assume that they are incapable of more.

WOOT page 20!!! In less than a day!!!

[camberiu]

How likely was it that they could hijack 4 different planes at the exact same time and hit 3 out of 4 targets? It happened, I do not assume that they are incapable of more.

They had THE FULL ELEMENT OF SURPRISE. OBL is now hidding on a cave in the middle of nowhere. He has no mobility. He can't use normal means of communication, etc... Worse, his goal is to tire us, to bankrupt us. That is how he defeated the Soviets (the CIA thought him the strategy) and he is doing the same thing to us. He does not need to attack the homeland anymore. He got us where he wanted, on a quagmire in Iraq. He can't hope to defeat us, so he is trying to wear us out, and he is being VERY successful at it. He also made us very very scared.

A few weeks ago, a small, single-engine plane inadvertently strayed into the closed air space above Washington. The result was panic. Both the White House and the Capitol were evacuated, with police shouting "Run! Run!" at fleeing staffers and visitors. Senators and Congressmen abandoned in haste the floors of their respective Houses. Various RIPs (Really Important People) were escorted to their Fuehrerbunkers. F-16s came close to shooting the Cessna down. The whole episode would have been funny if it weren’t so sad.
What message does such easy panic send to the rest of the world? Osama bin Laden has whole armies trying to kill him, but as best I know he has shown no signs of fear. Here again we see the power of the moral level of war. In cultures less decadent than our own, few men are likely to identify with leaders who fill their pants at one tiny blip on a radar screen.
This is the damage that OBL inflicted on us.

[BabyJesus]

Yeah im glad too that alot of american assholes dont live in canada too, look at it this way, america is a roach motel attracting all the unwantables.

Yep, I forgot that Canada was a utopia.

I may be an american asshole,but what does that make you? What has Canada done for the world, besides giving us the ubertalented Celine Dion?

[Kelegacy]

Yep, I forgot that Canada was a utopia.

I may be an american asshole,but what does that make you? What has Canada done for the world, besides giving us the ubertalented Celine Dion?

Wow, dude. Way to fulfill everyone's notions that Americans are dickheads. I feel ashamed to be a red, white, and bluer when people shit like that.

[camberiu]

Yep, I forgot that Canada was a utopia.

I may be an american asshole,but what does that make you? What has Canada done for the world, besides giving us the ubertalented Celine Dion?


Let me see.....Our northern neighboors gave shelter and received with open arms every slave that escaped the US. They are one of the top givers of International Aid to poor nations. They gave the world general Roméo Dallaire, who fought with tooth and nail to prevent the genocide in Rwanda (while the USA sat back and did nothing). Lester Pearson, the canadian guy who won the Nobel peace prize for comming up with the concept UN Peace Keeping missions. They also gave us the great rock band Rush, for which I am MOST grateful.

[GrinR]

I believe this thread has run out of steam. Camberiu punched his rant afterburners and we're all toast.

THREAD CLOSED!

[Phades]

No-one is to blame for terrorism. Terrorism is just acts or threats of violence by a group to reach a specific goal. Do you have a specific group/event in mind?

That has to be the most ridiculous response I've ever seen. I don't take sides in your argument here, but that was pathetic and I had to chime in. Of course the person who commits an act of terrorism is the one to be blamed for it. So if nobody is to blame, where does it come from? SOMEBODY has to do it. And considering that it's used against civilians, it's a pretty despicable "tactic." Nothing personal, that response just irritated me.

[Jetherik]

RakAEL!!! You dont use riflemen, get some Tesla Coils!!!! DUHH!!!

BTW sorry if I seem too optimistic, I am a 25yr old High School history teacher and motivateing kids to understand that they can make a difference is one thing I struggle at daily.

Intruder, you are right, Tesla Coils all the way. As to your optimisim, I truely do hope you have it in twenty years from now as you teach. Keep up the good work. My high school history teacher, Mr. Schmidley, taught me a lot 20 years ago and I still remember him. As lots of people say, History repeats itself over and over again. What is happening now seems very similar to other times in the past of other great countries. But yes, we can make a difference, if we stand up and pull someone kicking and screaming with us.

[falak]

That has to be the most ridiculous response I've ever seen. I don't take sides in your argument here, but that was pathetic and I had to chime in. Of course the person who commits an act of terrorism is the one to be blamed for it. So if nobody is to blame, where does it come from? SOMEBODY has to do it. And considering that it's used against civilians, it's a pretty despicable "tactic." Nothing personal, that response just irritated me.
Nobody can be blamed for "terrorism". This is simply part of human nature; retaliating with violence as a last resort. Now, because of your reaction, you are clearly referencing al-Qaeda. It is a dangerous thing to equate "terrorism" with just these people. Al-Qaeda are interesting, as they seem to be fighting for no-one but themselves. Everything they do is perceived as wrong by everyone except themselves (and rightly so). But I wasn't talking about them specifically. I'm sure you remember the old adage "One man's' terrorist is another man's' freedom fighter". Everything is relative. The actions of terrorists are often seen as righteous.

Terrorism has existed since before the United States of America. Remember that.

I look forward to your response.

EDIT: I'm going to add a bit more, just in case. Forget the word terrorism. Forget al-Qaeda. People fight. Mostly, they fight for a reason. Some see this reason as righteous, others don't (else there would not be a conflict). Some call them terrorists, some call them "freedom fighters". So who places the blame? Which "side"? Do you see how such a term is rendered redundant? With al-Qaeda it is easy to place the blame. They are not fighting for anything real (even if they state otherwise). But like I've already stated, I was not referring to them. Go back and read what I said. I'm sure you'll see it from my point of view. Isn't that what this is all about?

This is clearly just a misunderstanding. You think I'm defending al Qaeda al Jihad and I think you think blame is absolute.

[BabyJesus]

Wow, dude. Way to fulfill everyone's notions that Americans are dickheads. I feel ashamed to be a red, white, and bluer when people shit like that.


Anytime, just tired of these toads with thier bullshit "Glad I don't live there" stuff. I am not PC and will never be. I speak my mind and I'm proud of my country, go figure.

People act as if the people in charge of thier countries make good decisions all the time and I have never said to anyone "Glad I don't live there"...

What you should be ashamed of is NOT speaking up.

:o

[Phades]

Nobody can be blamed for "terrorism". This is simply part of human nature; retaliating with violence as a last resort. Now, because of your reaction, you are clearly referencing al-Qaeda. It is a dangerous thing to equate "terrorism" with just these people. Al-Qaeda are interesting, as they seem to be fighting for no-one but themselves. Everything they do is perceived as wrong by everyone except themselves (and rightly so). But I wasn't talking about them specifically. I'm sure you remember the old adage "One man's' terrorist is another man's' freedom fighter". Everything is relative. The actions of terrorists are often seen as righteous.

Terrorism has existed since before the United States of America. Remember that.

I look forward to your response.

EDIT: I'm going to add a bit more, just in case. Forget the word terrorism. Forget al-Qaeda. People fight. Mostly, they fight for a reason. Some see this reason as righteous, others don't (else there would not be a conflict). Some call them terrorists, some call them "freedom fighters". So who places the blame? Which "side"? Do you see how such a term is rendered redundant? With al-Qaeda it is easy to place the blame. They are not fighting for anything real (even if they state otherwise). But like I've already stated, I was not referring to them. Go back and read what I said. I'm sure you'll see it from my point of view. Isn't that what this is all about?

This is clearly just a misunderstanding. You think I'm defending al Qaeda al Jihad and I think you think blame is absolute.


Actually, I wasn't thinking of Al-Qaeda, I was thinking of terrorism period. Terrorism does not just mean to fight. And no, I didn't think you were so twisted as to actually defend Al-Qaeda. Terrorism is aimed at instilling terror in the populace. They don't care about any particular military goal, they just want to kill as many people as possilbe to "send a message." This, I believe, is what makes terrorism so horrible. It is one thing for a group to participate in Guerilla warfare against military targets and another to simply try to kill people as seen in Oklahoma, Israel, 9/11, and now Iraq.

Those who commit terrorist acts are sick and twisted. Those who would see those acts as "righteous" are themselves twisted. Someone who commits an act with the goal of murdering people and to scare others is always to blame for their actions. So yes, if you just want to murder, the blame against you is absolute.

[KarmaGhost]

Wow, i'm on Page 6 and I have my post-per-page at 40 posts. Largest thread ever? It has to be the fastest growing.

[falak]

At McVeigh's trial, the United States Government asserted that the motivation for the attack was to avenge the deaths of Branch Davidians near Waco, Texas, who he believed had been murdered by agents of the federal government.
McVeigh is responsible for 168 deaths. He blames the Federal Government, everyone else blames him. The "blame" lies in two different places. He is still responsible for 168 deaths.

It's the same in Israel and Iraq.

All conflict, including terrorism, is horrible. The blame will shift depending on where and when you live. I think we've come to a disagreement over the definition of "blame". If you kill someone, you are responsible. This is regardless of where you are or when. But blame? People often use blame as a justification for murder.

The IRA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_and_Tans) are the obvious example. So many agreed with the IRA in 1918, Sinn Féin gained a majority in the General Election. The Royal Irish Constabulary were deployed into Irelend. A lot of people died (on both sides). Each person who killed is responsible for that death. Obviously, each side blamed the other. Blame is not absolute.

Ultimately, I think we have had a language disagreement and nothing more.

[Savok]

Actually everyone blames the IRA these days after they offered to kill some people as an apology recently.

Man, I go to sleep and a few of you go into orbit to battle the Rovian Hypno-Toads.

And yes we can't blame the terrorists for the deliberate mass slaughter and terrorizing of innocents, after all they thought they had good reason.

Anyway, can anyone tell me why the foreign terrorist cells are in Iraq causing so much trouble?

[Intruder]

Wow, I must say that this has been an informative and fun debate. It has been great fun talking with you all. Special props for keeping it civil. It got heated yes, but it never disolved into bashing and name calling on a mass sscale. EA should be proud. So, peace out! Gotta go kill some terrorists in Battlefield 2!

[Savok]

Oh yes, I noticed someone mentioned the horrors in Sudan awhile back. They're on the UN human rights council as well as I recall.

Maybe it's about time the UN learnt to police itself?

[Juicy]

Ban burning the American Flag


Daily Show with Jon Stewart today made fun of the recent Congressional ban on burning the American flag. They pointed out that the US Flag Code says (they showed the passage) that the proper way to dispose of a flag that is no longer fit for display is to burn it.

[Citizen Philip]

Let's make a really outrageous example, and see if this outrageous example can perhaps put other things in a different perspective. I will start with the best line you could ever start with.

America is invaded by Aliens!

Not just any aliens, but aliens that come in peace: aliens that love democracy.

They take over your radio and TV signals, the horizontal the vertical and broadcast friendly messages indicating that you live under a capitalist fascist regime and they have come to liberate you.

The aliens then go warbling about in their all but invincible flying saucers laying waste to specific infrastructure and any pockets of armed resistance, with super alien technology they make the American armed forces look like cub scouts with walking sticks.

The aliens are so damn good at liberating you from your overlords they rarely miss a target, destroy supposedly secret underground bunkers with ease. Within 2 days it's all over. You are officially liberated, or so your TV and radio tells you.

In the process of rebuilding the infrastructure at a speed that makes you wonder why they destroyed it in the first place, other than the fact what has been replaced is alien and obviously "not from earth". Your benefactors decide that your media is decidedly morally bankrupt and will need to be fixed too. Most of your sports are also, decidedly 'not in view with a proper democratic' outlook and are put on hold indefinitely.

The aliens obviously don't want to rule over you, that isn't democratic, so a new government is created approved of and created by the aliens. Everyone elected is all excited about new democracy and are totally sympathetic to the new changes going through America, and are very happy they have been liberated by the intergalactic democracy patrol. Unheard of amounts of luxuries for those that work with them, advanced medical care, no bald spots and you get to live another hundred years. Of course, you also toe the new democratic line which is totally different, and nothing like what you know.

All the approved media is all about this new democracy and other approved subjects concerning your betterment as a person and to try and live happy and healthy, since you need alien approval - and them being so advanced, you never hear from anyone who might disagree.

So there you are. You can't watch your movies or TV anymore, because that stuff isn't approved: hell you can't even get your old TV and crap working because the aliens use some weird electrical current that isn't compliant. Your job isn't the same anymore, and those working with the aliens are just well, so much better off than you.

You hear, by word of mouth about people who disagree with these aliens: they are the people fighting back and claiming they've been invaded by hostile aliens who've setup a puppet government: obviously these nutcase fanatics held power in the capitalist fascist regime and only want their power back! They are miscreant and radicals, report them immediately!

And how is this: The aliens really do bring democracy, don't care or need anything from Earth and are doing it in the pursuit of pure democracy - in a way so alien, no motive other than desiring for you to be free, healthy and happy is their desire.

Or maybe that's what they want you to think and those radicals are the last freedom fighters trying to save their people from a indifferent, hostile force that has absolutely every advantage, and a greedy people ready to kowtow and bow down to new Alien Overlords that shower those that work with them many gifts.

Let's say you want to fight back, who are your targets?

I always like stories about Alien invasion. Anyone up for some War of Worlds?

[Savok]

You forgot the fundamentalists from the Moon who hate the aliens simply for existing, coming in their own ships to cause chaos in America.

Cutting through your bullshit we can say that:

Giving Iraq such alien concepts as human rights, a real voice and access to the real world is a terrible thing.

This alien concept is a lie and the Americans control everything (as opposed to Saddam controlling everything but we can't mention that).

The insurgents are actually freedom fighters (even though the worst of them have come from surrounding areas to simply murder people and sabotage anything and everything) going up against those greedy, cowardly collaborators! Like those damn civilians!

Solidarity brothers!

[falak]

Actually everyone blames the IRA these days after they offered to kill some people as an apology recently.Your usage of the term "actually" implies a conflict between our points, when in fact your point offers an excellent example of the relativistic nature of the situation, seen with your usage of "these days" and the fact "everyone now blames the IRA".
The blame will shift depending on where and when you live

[Savok]

Was your point the perception or actuality of fault?

[falak]

It depends on your definition of 'fault' (I'm bogging this down with semantics and I apologize).

If you mean "You killed my mother, so it's your fault she's dead", then I mean actuality (responsibility).

If you mean fault in the same way I mean blame, then perception (as perception obviously changes from person to person, as does blame). This is what I've mainly been focusing on. "You killed by mother, so it's your fault I killed your brother". This is the rationale we often hear from terrorists, and this was my original point.

You, see? We agree with each other!

[Savok]

I like semantics. You were talking about perception then, fair enough. I've dealt with too many people who say "Zionists control the media, it's all a conspiracy led by Karl Rove" and are serious about it.

[diggable]

http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty1.html

Monday, June 27, 2005

Mr. Chip Meany
Code Enforcement Officer
Town of Weare, New Hampshire
Fax 603-529-4554


Dear Mr. Meany,

I am proposing to build a hotel at 34 Cilley Hill Road in the Town of Weare. I would like to know the process your town has for allowing such a development.


Although this property is owned by an individual, David H. Souter, a recent Supreme Court decision, "Kelo vs. City of New London" clears the way for this land to be taken by the Government of Weare through eminent domain and given to my LLC for the purposes of building a hotel. The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare.

As I understand it your town has five people serving on the Board of Selectmen. Therefore, since it will require only three people to vote in favor of the use of eminent domain I am quite confident that this hotel development is a viable project. I am currently seeking investors and hotel plans from an architect. Please let me know the proper steps to follow to proceed in accordance with the law in your town.


Thank you.


Sincerely,


Logan Darrow Clements
Freestar Media, LLC