Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

Jim Thompson wrote:
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?

Turkey is our one true ally in the region. Without their help,
the war in Iraq could not have been prosecuted.

So, the Democrats are trying to **** off Turkey so they will kick
us out of their country (we have a major base there), and will
make the war in Iraq more dangerous for our kids fighting it.

Mean spirited? Yep! But with Democrats (most politicians, actually)
the ends always justifies the means.

-Chuck

flipper posted to sci.electronics.design:

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:06:01 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
Where's the benefit to our country when a
Democratic-Party-dominated Congress is trying to pass a bill
chastising the Turks for Armenian "genocide" that occurred in
1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good
ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?

Turkey is our one true ally in the region. Without their help,
the war in Iraq could not have been prosecuted.

So, the Democrats are trying to **** off Turkey so they will kick
us out of their country (we have a major base there), and will
make the war in Iraq more dangerous for our kids fighting it.

That sure looks like the reason and if it is then it dern near
amounts to treason.


Mean spirited? Yep! But with Democrats (most politicians,
actually) the ends always justifies the means.

-Chuck

Yes, as well as arrogant and vicious.

Jim Thompson wrote:
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?

They're tired of Bush being in the running for the Greatest Doof of All
Time?

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

On 16/10/2007 Jim Thompson wrote:

Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?

...Jim Thompson

These are politicians we are talking about. They do not do it to
benefit the country, only themselves. For the destination of any benfit
going, look in their pockets.

--
John B

Jim Thompson wrote:
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!
(snip)

It is an invitation for them to pass a similar statement
about our genocide of the Amerinds. We need to admit this,
but cannot bring ourselves to do it, so we are motivating
them to do it for us. The difference between their genocide
and ours, is that their present government was not
responsible but ours was.

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 20:52:44 -0400, John Popelish
wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!
(snip)

It is an invitation for them to pass a similar statement
about our genocide of the Amerinds. We need to admit this,
but cannot bring ourselves to do it, so we are motivating
them to do it for us. The difference between their genocide
and ours, is that their present government was not
responsible but ours was.

Horse pucky. Do you think our present government bears any
resemblance to our government back then?

Our present government can't even kiss its own ass without
apologizing... when the Democrats gain power it will be the beginning
of the end... much like that of the Roman Empire :-(

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

"John Popelish" schreef in bericht
. ..
Jim Thompson wrote:
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!
(snip)

It is an invitation for them to pass a similar statement about our
genocide of the Amerinds. We need to admit this, but cannot bring
ourselves to do it, so we are motivating them to do it for us. The
difference between their genocide and ours, is that their present
government was not responsible but ours was.

A more important difference is that a US judge/jury will not condemn you for
admitting, the Turkish will do. (Or did so till very recently.) Nevertheless
I also ask what reasons a US Congress has to pass a bill about another
country internal affairs. If Turkish politicians lie about it, so what? They
might have learned from their US colleagues. So they better concentrate on
the human rights like freedom of press. Not in a US law but by diplomacy in
foreign affairs.

petrus bitbyter

petrus bitbyter wrote:

I also ask what reasons a US Congress has to pass a bill about another
country internal affairs.

LOL !

The US has a long history of meddling in other countries' internal affairs
including supporting military coups ! Passing a Bill asking Turkey to 'own up'
to genocide is quite mild in comparison.

Graham

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:33:13 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



petrus bitbyter wrote:

I also ask what reasons a US Congress has to pass a bill about another
country internal affairs.

LOL !

The US has a long history of meddling in other countries' internal affairs
including supporting military coups ! Passing a Bill asking Turkey to 'own up'
to genocide is quite mild in comparison.

---
"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" dontcha
know...

I suspect that "The sun never sets on the British Empire" didn't
come about by you all not meddling in other countries' internal
affairs.


--
JF

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
petrus bitbyter wrote:

I also ask what reasons a US Congress has to pass a bill about another
country internal affairs.

LOL !

The US has a long history of meddling in other countries' internal affairs
including supporting military coups ! Passing a Bill asking Turkey to 'own up'
to genocide is quite mild in comparison.

---
"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" dontcha
know...

I suspect that "The sun never sets on the British Empire" didn't
come about by you all not meddling in other countries' internal
affairs.

The difference being that we've long stopped doing it except of course for the
recent Iraq nonsense which was at the behest of the USA in its new Imperial quest.

Graham

flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
petrus bitbyter wrote:

I also ask what reasons a US Congress has to pass a bill about another
country internal affairs.

LOL !

The US has a long history of meddling in other countries' internal affairs
including supporting military coups ! Passing a Bill asking Turkey to 'own up'
to genocide is quite mild in comparison.

Dead people can't "own up" to a 95 year old situation.

It's the *live people* who are being asked to do that actually.

Graham

flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
flipper wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
petrus bitbyter wrote:

I also ask what reasons a US Congress has to pass a bill about another
country internal affairs.

LOL !

The US has a long history of meddling in other countries' internal affairs
including supporting military coups ! Passing a Bill asking Turkey to 'own up'
to genocide is quite mild in comparison.

Dead people can't "own up" to a 95 year old situation.

It's the *live people* who are being asked to do that actually.

Right. People who weren't even born at the time, hadn't one damn thing
to do with it, nor can they do anything about it. Plus not even
technically the same 'country' (Ottoman Empire) or government.

No different from blacks seeking to castigate Britain for its involvement in the slave
trade which has been a recent topic of debate and a public statement on the issue has
recently been made by the British Goverment.

It's probably largely silly but it wouldn't actually hurt Turkey to admit what
happened.


In other words, typical left wing stupidity of poking sticks in
people's eyes for no productive purpose whatsoever other than to
mollify their apparently insatiable desire to poke sticks in people's
eyes.

As opposed to right wing tactics of poking guns in peoples' faces !


Btw, it was a 'jihad' to eradicate (Armenian) Christians because they
were, obviously, not Muslim. You know, the sort of thing you've
claimed either doesn't exist or is nothing but a 'few kooks'.

Uh ? Cite please.

Graham

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?


The absolutely only reason they are doing this is because of the war in
iraq. They cannot get tehre way with the troops so they resort to **** like
this. They know damn well what its going to do and thats why they did it
now. They've probably had that ace up there sleeve for years.

And no, they are not that stupid. Most americans are and hence will fall for
it. The outcome is that turkey will probably kick us out and more solders
will get killed from it(in which democrates will whine more and do more to
make the us loose in iraq and more will get killed). The democrates will
stop at nothing to get there way no matter the cost. They see it as a
political issue and could care less about its long term effects on
American's. (did you ever think they actually really care about you and me?
(of course republicans don't care either))

Jon Slaughter wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote

Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?

The absolutely only reason they are doing this is because of the war in
iraq. They cannot get tehre way with the troops so they resort to **** like
this. They know damn well what its going to do and thats why they did it
now. They've probably had that ace up there sleeve for years.

I'd say it's more likely they're doing it in order to present a position
consistent with the EU who are also asking for Turkey to address this matter.

Graham

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message
...
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

It depends upon if you believe in freedom of speech. The bill is not only
about events that happened 92 years ago but about events that are
happening today.

Here is a quote from a BBC article on this topic:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been prosecuted
for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Here is another article upon a Turkish journalist who was murdered because
he wrote about the genocide: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6289275.stm

Dan Coby wrote:

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Oh, you mean like the Patriot Act and the DMCA? :-)

CptDondo wrote:

Dan Coby wrote:

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Oh, you mean like the Patriot Act and the DMCA? :-)

I suspect he means EXACTLY like that.

Graham

On 10/17/07 11:34 AM, in article ,
"CptDondo" wrote:

Dan Coby wrote:

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Oh, you mean like the Patriot Act and the DMCA? :-)

Ok! That's twice. Say what you mean to say and don't be so chicken ****.

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:29:59 -0700, "Dan Coby"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message
.. .
Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

It depends upon if you believe in freedom of speech. The bill is not only
about events that happened 92 years ago but about events that are
happening today.

Here is a quote from a BBC article on this topic:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been prosecuted
for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Here is another article upon a Turkish journalist who was murdered because
he wrote about the genocide: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6289275.stm


(1) I don't give a damn what the BBC has to say on ANY subject.

(2) I consider any attempt to damage US relations with a very good
ally a treasonous act. I note this morning that the Democrat fairies
sent Murtha out to make a statement withdrawing the attempt. He
should be hanged.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

Dan Coby wrote:

"Jim Thompson" wrote

Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

It depends upon if you believe in freedom of speech. The bill is not only
about events that happened 92 years ago but about events that are
happening today.

Here is a quote from a BBC article on this topic:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been prosecuted
for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Here is another article upon a Turkish journalist who was murdered because
he wrote about the genocide: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6289275.stm

And Turkey couldn't wouldn't be allowed to join the EU with laws like that on the
statute book..

Graham

Eeyore posted to
sci.electronics.design:



Dan Coby wrote:

"Jim Thompson"
wrote

Where's the benefit to our country when a
Democratic-Party-dominated Congress is trying to pass a bill
chastising the Turks for Armenian "genocide" that occurred in
1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

It depends upon if you believe in freedom of speech. The bill is
not only about events that happened 92 years ago but about events
that are happening today.

Here is a quote from a BBC article on this topic:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of
the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been
prosecuted for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Here is another article upon a Turkish journalist who was murdered
because
he wrote about the genocide:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6289275.stm

And Turkey couldn't wouldn't be allowed to join the EU with laws
like that on the statute book..

Graham

Make couldn't/wouldn't into shouldn't and you might get closer but it
will be anyway, you could have easily done better.

"flipper" wrote in message ...
When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Then you should speak to the French because their parliament voted to
make denying it was genocide a crime and in 1990 they made it a crime
to deny the Jewish Holocaust.

Might want to speak to the Swiss too because they apparently also
passed a law making it illegal.

Seems the E.U. has a case of pot-kettle-pot=kettle.

I do not think that any government should put any constraint upon the free speech
of its citizens. This includes both denying and requiring that the events in
Turkey in 1915 be called a genocide, or requiring or denying the Holocaust, etc.

What happened in 1915 in Turkey was terrible. However all of the people
involved are dead. Thus I consider the issue only important as a lesson to
be learned about what should not be done. To me, history is important as
a means to learn about both the good and bad things that people can do.

I am bothered by the current government in Turkey (or any other
government) prosecuting its citizens for crimes like 'an insult against
the Turkish state' (also known as Article 301). Nobel laureate Orham Pamuk
was convicted under that law. The journalist Hrant Dink was also convicted
under that law for writing about those events. He was latter murdered.

In defense of Turkey, the government is currently prosecuting people for Dink's
murder and there are efforts by various groups to change Article 301:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/25/wo.../Dink,%20Hrant
(You will note that this URL is from the NY Times since a previous poster refused
to believe the BBC.)

I am bothered by many in this country (U. S.) that consider any disagreement
with the Bush government as being 'treasonous'. I consider this a violation
of the basic concepts of free speech that this country has as one of its
founding (and greatest) principles.

I do realize that pretty much all peoples and all governments have
committed hypocrisies with regard to both prosecution of sub groups and
also limitations on free speech. This does not mean that we should not try to
improve both ourselves and our governments.

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:00:33 -0700, "Dan Coby"
wrote:

[snip]

I am bothered by many in this country (U. S.) that consider any disagreement
with the Bush government as being 'treasonous'. I consider this a violation
of the basic concepts of free speech that this country has as one of its
founding (and greatest) principles.

[snip]

It is certainly not treasonous to _speak_ of anything. But for a
governmental body (Congress), presently dominated by the pansy side of
our population, to attempt to create a BILL to antagonize one of our
best allies... that IS treason.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

On 10/18/07 8:00 AM, in article ,
"Jim Thompson" wrote:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:00:33 -0700, "Dan Coby"
wrote:

[snip]

I am bothered by many in this country (U. S.) that consider any disagreement
with the Bush government as being 'treasonous'. I consider this a violation
of the basic concepts of free speech that this country has as one of its
founding (and greatest) principles.

[snip]

It is certainly not treasonous to _speak_ of anything. But for a
governmental body (Congress), presently dominated by the pansy side of
our population, to attempt to create a BILL to antagonize one of our
best allies... that IS treason.

More of your ignorant BS. It is NOT treasonable.

I can see why you would be upset..... You pick your friends according to
whether they agree with you and what they might do for you, so by
transference, you believe the US government should do the same.

Some of us (the leftist weenie contingent by your definition) care about the
character of the people we choose to call, and treat as, friend. The
government of Turkey, by officially denying it's citizens free speech, shows
a serious lack of character, dangerously similar to other government leaders
that the US and other governments have castigated.

Is Turkey it's government, or it's people?

You initiated this thread with a blurting of your personal opinion (as you
often do). Why don't you expect better of yourself?



...Jim Thompson

Don Bowey wrote:

Some of us (the leftist weenie contingent by your definition) care about the
character of the people we choose to call, and treat as, friend. The
government of Turkey, by officially denying it's citizens free speech, shows
a serious lack of character, dangerously similar to other government leaders
that the US and other governments have castigated.

The USA has a long history of supporting tyrants.

Including Saddam when it suited the USA.

Graham

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:42:34 -0700, Don Bowey
wrote:

On 10/18/07 8:00 AM, in article ,
"Jim Thompson" wrote:

[snip]

It is certainly not treasonous to _speak_ of anything. But for a
governmental body (Congress), presently dominated by the pansy side of
our population, to attempt to create a BILL to antagonize one of our
best allies... that IS treason.

More of your ignorant BS. It is NOT treasonable.

I can see why you would be upset..... You pick your friends according to
whether they agree with you and what they might do for you, so by
transference, you believe the US government should do the same.

[A]

How I pick my personal friends and how governments form self-serving
ALLIANCES are two entirely different situations. You have absolutely
no clue about me PERSONALLY.

What do YOU call what the Democrats attempted?


Some of us (the leftist weenie contingent by your definition) care about the
character of the people we choose to call, and treat as, friend. The
government of Turkey, by officially denying it's citizens free speech, shows
a serious lack of character, dangerously similar to other government leaders
that the US and other governments have castigated.

Is Turkey it's government, or it's people?

Turkey is a BENEFICIAL ALLY, irrespective of how they run their own
country.


You initiated this thread with a blurting of your personal opinion (as you
often do). Why don't you expect better of yourself?

Typical leftist weenie SUBTERFUGE as a response.

Return to [A] above.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

Jim Thompson posted to
sci.electronics.design:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:00:33 -0700, "Dan Coby"
wrote:

[snip]

I am bothered by many in this country (U. S.) that consider any
disagreement with the Bush government as being 'treasonous'. I
consider this a violation of the basic concepts of free speech that
this country has as one of its founding (and greatest) principles.

[snip]

It is certainly not treasonous to _speak_ of anything. But for a
governmental body (Congress), presently dominated by the pansy side
of our population, to attempt to create a BILL to antagonize one of
our best allies... that IS treason.

...Jim Thompson

If you made that current ally of the week you might be closer to the
truth. Over the long haul Turkey has not been a regular friend to
the US.
On the other hand authoring, let alone passing bills, to try to make
political points, that antagonize any other government for any cause
is despicable.

"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:00:33 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:00:33 -0700, "Dan Coby"
wrote:

[snip]

I am bothered by many in this country (U. S.) that consider any
disagreement
with the Bush government as being 'treasonous'. I consider this a
violation
of the basic concepts of free speech that this country has as one of its
founding (and greatest) principles.

[snip]

It is certainly not treasonous to _speak_ of anything. But for a
governmental body (Congress), presently dominated by the pansy side of
our population, to attempt to create a BILL to antagonize one of our
best allies... that IS treason.

It would be 'treason' only if they intended to give aid and/or comfort
to the enemy.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason


Do you not believe that the ramifications of what will most likely happen on
passing such a bill actually does? It is definitely an act of disloyalty.
Infact,

"To avoid the abuses of the English law (including executions by Henry VIII
of those who criticized his repeated marriages), treason was specifically
defined in the United States Constitution, the only crime so defined.
Article III Section 3 delineates treason as follows:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against
them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No
Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two
Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no
Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except
during the Life of the Person attainted."

Essentially they are giving aid and comfort to Al-Qaeda and iran. They are
trying to get american's out of iraq any way they can and they are going so
far as to indirectly support the enemey.


But just plain stupid is another matter.

Stupidity is not an excuse for treason.

"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:28:50 -0500, "Jon Slaughter"
wrote:


"flipper" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:00:33 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:00:33 -0700, "Dan Coby"
wrote:

[snip]

I am bothered by many in this country (U. S.) that consider any
disagreement
with the Bush government as being 'treasonous'. I consider this a
violation
of the basic concepts of free speech that this country has as one of
its
founding (and greatest) principles.

[snip]

It is certainly not treasonous to _speak_ of anything. But for a
governmental body (Congress), presently dominated by the pansy side of
our population, to attempt to create a BILL to antagonize one of our
best allies... that IS treason.

It would be 'treason' only if they intended to give aid and/or comfort
to the enemy.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason


Do you not believe that the ramifications of what will most likely happen
on
passing such a bill actually does?

So you declare 'treason' based on your supposedly 'likely' crystal
ball prognostications?

It is definitely an act of disloyalty.
Infact,

As I've already said, it depends on what each person's belief and
motivations are and it is quite possible that someone else's crystal
ball glows a different Auntie Em than yours.

What if one were to say they are absolutely convinced beyond any doubt
there is not a rat's chance in hell any of your 'prognostications'
could possibly happen? What evidence do you have of your crystal
ball's infallibility and that everyone knows it?

"To avoid the abuses of the English law (including executions by Henry
VIII
of those who criticized his repeated marriages), treason was specifically
defined in the United States Constitution, the only crime so defined.
Article III Section 3 delineates treason as follows:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War
against
them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No
Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two
Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no
Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except
during the Life of the Person attainted."

Essentially they are giving aid and comfort to Al-Qaeda and iran. They are
trying to get american's out of iraq any way they can and they are going
so
far as to indirectly support the enemey.

That's your opinion of what you presume they're thinking but I'm not
convinced your mind reading abilities are any more reliable than a
crystal ball.

But just plain stupid is another matter.

Stupidity is not an excuse for treason.

Intent is always a factor.

To wit, a squad commander who orders his men --- that-a-way to
escape an ambush only to discover they've inadvertently run smack dab
into a machine gun nest hasn't committed 'treason' despite the
superficial appearance that the maneuver 'aided' the enemy.

Your a moron. You want to play dumb when its something that you don't agree
with. Yet you probably believe in every conspiracy out there when it works
for you. Fact of the matter is that probability is used by every, even you.
When one weighs all the evidence there is little doubt that the liberals are
doing this exactly in realtion to the war in iraq. If not then why did it
take them almost 100 years to do it? Why so convienent just before the
elections and durring a war? if they've waited at least 75 years why can't
they wait another 5? Why didn't they do this 10 years ago?

It accomplishes almost absolutely nothing in the big picture in actual
reference to what happened. Why do you think will comeout of it if, say, we
were not in the middle east and we didn't have any relations with turkey?
Its something called "To little, to late". Guess you don't understand that.
But when you take in the context of Iraq and how the democrates have been
trying to sabatage the effort there since it started then it all makes
sense.

Anyways... enough of your idocity... go play somewhere else.

"flipper" wrote in message news
snip

I am bothered by the current government in Turkey (or any other
government) prosecuting its citizens for crimes like 'an insult against
the Turkish state' (also known as Article 301).

So am I and, if the circumstances were appropriate, that would be the
thrust of my argument, not taking a specific 'thought' or
interpretation of events and demanding one 'official accept' it,
because how can one argue for 'free speech' while simultaneously
demanding only a particular form of speech be legal on the exact same
matter?

I do not understand your statement. I have not demanded that any specific
official accept any specific statement beyond the concept that all citizens
of any country have the basic right of free speech. Any country which restricts
the speech of its citizens is not 'free'. To prosecute Turkish citizens for
writing about the Armenian genocide violates the concept of free speech.
For the U. S. Congress to protest the actions of the Turkish government
and Article 301 is a reasonable action.

That is such a blatant contradiction in terms as to defy a 'woops'
explanation so I would not be surprised at all if the target of the
demands concluded a different and nefarious motive were involved.

I do not believe that protesting a government prosecuting its citizens,
for trying to exercise what should be considered free speech, a 'contradiction'.

snip

(You will note that this URL is from the NY Times since a previous poster refused
to believe the BBC.)

As a side note, I'm not sure he'd give the NY Times much, if any, more
credibility.

Probably true. Here is a URL from Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Apr...Turkey,00.html

I am bothered by many in this country (U. S.) that consider any disagreement
with the Bush government as being 'treasonous'. I consider this a violation
of the basic concepts of free speech that this country has as one of its
founding (and greatest) principles.

Then you're bothered by nothing more than propaganda by the outrageous
in defense of the outrageous because people haven't called
'disagreement' treasonous. People are simply outraged by the
outrageous.

There have been other postings in this sequence which claim that any
disagreement with the war in Irag is treason. The argument given is that
any disagreement gives 'aid and confort to the enemy'. By extension of
this logic, any disagreement with the Bush presidency (or any other
future group in power) is treason. This sort of argument effectively makes
a mockery of the concept of freedom of speech.

This discussion on the Armenian genocide is a fine example. Several
posters have claimed that since Turkey is part of the American effort
in Iraq, that any disagreement with Turkey is treason. I strongly disagree
with that claim.

For example, saying, as was done just this week by some loons, that
"the job" of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is "to kill mothers and daughters"
is not 'disagreement', it's a flat ass lie. And if a rightly outraged
citizen, in the heat of discussion, should express the opinion "that
sounds almost treasonous because all that lie does is give the enemy
more propaganda to inflame and recruit jihadists with which to kill
our soldiers" then.... well, I thought you just said you were for
'free speech'.

Outrageous claims by any group usually serve very little positive purpose
in any reasonable discussion. Outrageous counter claims also do not
add to the discussion. (Two wrongs do not make a right.)

The time to be 'bothered' would be if a significant number of persons
with sufficient credibility and authority seriously suggested 'there
oughta be a law' but the only incident I've seen even remotely
resembling such a thing was 41, or so, Senators writing a joint letter
on official letterhead trying to get a radio talk show host they don't
like to 'apologize', be censured, or fired for saying something they
didn't like.

I have never seen any of Don Imus' work. His comment about the Rutger's
women's basketball team seemed like it was in extremely bad taste.
I have not seen the entire context of Imus' statements so I do not have
a complete basis for judgement. However I do agree that much of the
reaction to it smelled of various groups trying to get political advantage
from it. My guess is that by the time that the smoke has finally cleared
Imus will be ahead of the game. I have seen a discussion on a legal
commentary web site that said that Imus probably has a very good
breach of contract claim. Sometimes the best thing to do with
assholes is to ignore them.

I do realize that pretty much all peoples and all governments have
committed hypocrisies with regard to both prosecution of sub groups and
also limitations on free speech. This does not mean that we should not try to
improve both ourselves and our governments.

Improving one's self can be a wonderful thing. Gets a bit dicey,
though, when you 'demand' that someone else 'improve' according to
your version of history. That's not quite 'yourself' anymore.

I have not demanded any specific interpretation of history. What I do
desire that Turkey (and all governments) stop prosecuting their
citizens for trying to exercise the right of free speech. Article 301 is
basically incompatible with the basic concepts of a free people.

Too many groups (of both the left and right) want to use the power of
their government to enforce their own version of history. The founders
of this country believed (and I strongly agree) that freedom of speech
is a critical counter balance to the power of government.

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 23:37:48 -0700, "Dan Coby"
wrote:


Outrageous claims by any group usually serve very little positive purpose
in any reasonable discussion. Outrageous counter claims also do not
add to the discussion. (Two wrongs do not make a right.)

---
However, two wrongs often make the left.


--
JF

"flipper" wrote in message ...

snip

Too many groups (of both the left and right) want to use the power of
their government to enforce their own version of history. The founders
of this country believed (and I strongly agree) that freedom of speech
is a critical counter balance to the power of government.

As I said in the portions you snipped out, tell it to France and
Switzerland, then, because they "did" make a particular interpretation
of history and speech 'illegal'.

As I also said in portions that I snipped, I do not agree with the actions
of the EU or Switzerland with regard to requiring the use of the word
'genocide'. I do support actions which encourage the Turkish government
to stop prosecuting its citizens under Article 301.

flipper wrote:

"Dan Coby" wrote:

As I also said in portions that I snipped, I do not agree with the actions
of the EU or Switzerland with regard to requiring the use of the word
'genocide'. I do support actions which encourage the Turkish government
to stop prosecuting its citizens under Article 301.

Yes, as well as my response that I agreed. But don't feign 'confusion'
about the rest when it's clear from the context you removed.

My post, to which you were replying. specifically listed the
French/Swiss laws and a comment about the E.U having a case of 'free
speech' pot-kettle-pot-kettle so it is no mystery what 'contradiction'
I was talking about.

There is no *EU* law about holocaust denial. It's down to individual countries to do that. Both
Germany and Austria have such a law btw.

" Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 14 countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech
Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Spain and Switzerland."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

Graham

flipper wrote:

"Dan Coby" wrote:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been prosecuted
for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Then you should speak to the French because their parliament voted to
make denying it was genocide a crime and in 1990 they made it a crime
to deny the Jewish Holocaust.

Might want to speak to the Swiss too because they apparently also
passed a law making it illegal.

Seems the E.U. has a case of pot-kettle-pot=kettle.

Where is the restriction on ** discussing ** the holocaust ?

Graham

flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
flipper wrote:
"Dan Coby" wrote:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been prosecuted
for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Then you should speak to the French because their parliament voted to
make denying it was genocide a crime and in 1990 they made it a crime
to deny the Jewish Holocaust.

Might want to speak to the Swiss too because they apparently also
passed a law making it illegal.

Seems the E.U. has a case of pot-kettle-pot=kettle.

Where is the restriction on ** discussing ** the holocaust ?

Thank you for clarifying that your version of 'free speech' is as long
as you use the proper terms and say the proper thing and don't speak
something illegal.

Why would anyone want to deny a historical fact anyway ?

Can you tell me that ?

Graham

On 10/18/07 6:41 AM, in article , "Eeyore"
wrote:



flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
flipper wrote:
"Dan Coby" wrote:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been prosecuted
for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Then you should speak to the French because their parliament voted to
make denying it was genocide a crime and in 1990 they made it a crime
to deny the Jewish Holocaust.

Might want to speak to the Swiss too because they apparently also
passed a law making it illegal.

Seems the E.U. has a case of pot-kettle-pot=kettle.

Where is the restriction on ** discussing ** the holocaust ?

Thank you for clarifying that your version of 'free speech' is as long
as you use the proper terms and say the proper thing and don't speak
something illegal.

Why would anyone want to deny a historical fact anyway ?

Can you tell me that ?

Yes. They are pathetically ignorant and some of the government officials
probably have family that were involved in the debacle.



Graham

On 10/18/07 8:37 AM, in article ,
"flipper" wrote:

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:41:11 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
flipper wrote:
"Dan Coby" wrote:

"In Turkey, the penal code makes calling "for the recognition of the
Armenian genocide" illegal. Writers and translators have been prosecuted
for attempting to stimulate debate on the subject."

The full article is at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm

When a country makes even discussing history a crime then those who
believe in freedom of speech should not be quiet.

Then you should speak to the French because their parliament voted to
make denying it was genocide a crime and in 1990 they made it a crime
to deny the Jewish Holocaust.

Might want to speak to the Swiss too because they apparently also
passed a law making it illegal.

Seems the E.U. has a case of pot-kettle-pot=kettle.

Where is the restriction on ** discussing ** the holocaust ?

Thank you for clarifying that your version of 'free speech' is as long
as you use the proper terms and say the proper thing and don't speak
something illegal.

Why would anyone want to deny a historical fact anyway ?

Only those involved know for sure what their motives were so your
question is based on a false premise.

What is the false premise?



Can you tell me that ?


Graham

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 20:13:12 UTC, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?


Sounds like a waste of time. Now if the historians want to establish
the truth, that's a different matter.

It does have similarities with pursuing WW2 war criminals who must now
be at least 80 years old.



--
Jim Backus running OS/2 Warp 3 & 4, Debian Linux and Win98SE
bona fide replies to j dot backus the circle thingy jita dot
demon dot co dot uk

Jim Thompson wrote:

Where's the benefit to our country when a Democratic-Party-dominated
Congress is trying to pass a bill chastising the Turks for Armenian
"genocide" that occurred in 1915... NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO?

The answer... NONE!

It's nothing but a mean-spirited attempt to anger a very good ally.

Are Democrats SO stupid as to think that most Americans will not
recognize this attempt for exactly what it is?

Do Americans care? Anyway, it is just something to put pressure on
Turkey not to invade the relatively peacefull northern part of Iraq.
Such an invasion would cause even more trouble in this troublesome
part of the world.

--
Reply to nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
Bedrijven en winkels vindt U op www.adresboekje.nl