Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
When Does Free Speech Become Treason?
The Fifth Column/Barbara Stock December 14, 2005 - At almost the precise moment that some leftists were proclaiming Iraq a total loss, a plane carrying the newly printed ballots and ballot boxes for Iraq's first true, democratic, and free election were being unloaded in Baghdad. As the Iraqi Stock Exchange opened with all the chaos and excitement of the New York Stock Exchange, Rep. Nancy Pelosi was making the statement that our military had made no gains at all in Iraq and that the troops should be pulled out immediately. When Senator John Kerry sought out a microphone to babble nearly incoherently about benchmarks versus timetables, it was noted that weddings in war-torn Baghdad are on the rise as young couples find they now have the hope of a future in a free Iraq. Congressman Harry Reid claims the fledgling Iraqi military and police are just using our troops and we should "remove their training-wheels." Reid believes that if left to the Iraqis, American troops would be in Iraq forever protecting them because the Iraqi people are apparently too lazy too protect themselves. Reid simply ignores the thousands of Iraqis that have died trying to do that very thing. Other leftists claim our troops are seen and hated as an "occupying force" and want us to leave now and never return. Just a few months ago, the mantra of the leftists was that there were not enough troops in Iraq to do the job, now they say there are too many. The Iraqi people are used to chaos. For them, life goes on. Yes, there are bombings and kidnappings, murder, mayhem, and death in some areas, but according to Senator Lieberman most Iraqis seem to believe Iraq is better now and will be even better next year. One would never know this by listening to Nancy Pelosi or Congressman John Murtha. For people who think as these two leftists, winning is not an option. In fact, winning is impossible. Congressman Murtha has declared our military broken and living "hand to mouth." This was news to the US Marine who did a radio interview after returning from his usual Friday night supper of steak and lobster at the Halliburton-run mess hall. The father of a Marine serving in Iraq stated in an e-mail message that the only piece of equipment his son purchased for himself were his sunglasses because the ones issued just weren't cool enough for Marines. Other than that, he apparently had everything he needed. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean made the statement, "The idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong." This statement was made on the very day that Saddam Hussein's trial began in earnest in Baghdad, presided over by men possessing unbelievable courage that the pampered Howard Dean could never understand. At Saddam's trial, a distraught and crying witness related seeing babies born in prison only to die and be thrown away like garbage. He states that he saw the remains of some poor souls who had been put through a meat grinder and all the while, an American, former Attorney General Ramsey Clark took over Saddam's legal defense urging disruption and chaos in the courtroom. Ramsey Clark is on record from the 1990's as believing that Saddam was innocent of any the crimes for which he now stands accused. Clark claimed the charges were "garbage and propaganda." Even now, he claims that since an attempt was made on Saddam's life, Saddam had every right seek out the guilty parties. Clark had no comments on the torture and rapes. Perhaps he feels that was Saddam's right as well. Senator Kerry accused our soldiers and Marines of carrying out terror attacks on innocent Iraqi women and children. Old habits die hard. Another leftist, Senator Charles Schumer of New York, spoke on television about how the elections in Iraq are "sort of being imposed" on the Iraqi people. Schumer predicts failure in Iraq. Forgotten, or ignored, are the pictures of the Iraqi people, one woman arriving to vote for the first time at the age of 90 in a wheelbarrow. Gone is the memory of the Iraqi people proudly holding up their purple fingers in defiance of the Islamic terrorists who threatened to kill them for voting. Article III of the United States Constitution declares that treason against the United States consists of: levying war against them; or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. SNIP If one did not know these statements had come from American men and women in political office and high visibility, it would seem the remarks were lifted off the pages of Al Jazeera or an Al Qaeda website. Of course, each statement has been broadcast by Al Jazeera and repeated throughout the Arab/Muslim world many times. These leftist politicians are probably held in high esteem...by the enemy. Democrats have compared our soldiers and their "tactics" to Nazis and Pol Pot. Democrats have called our soldiers everything from losers, too weak and incompetent to win the war in Iraq to being terrorists who use Nazi-like tactics. When is the line between legal objections to the war and treasonous statements crossed? When does "free speech" begin to give aid and comfort to the enemy? When American troops are on the battlefield, is it treason to refer to their actions as terrorist acts? Does it give the enemy hope when powerful people declare that the war is all but lost and that our troops are criminals? Of course it does! Many leftists are either oblivious to the aid and comfort they give to the enemy or they no longer care. Sadly, it seems to be the latter. Their hatred of Bush overrides all else. No rational mind could believe leftists any longer when they claim to love their country or support the troops. How can leftists support troops that they claim torture and terrorize innocent people? How can leftists support troops that they claim are losers? How can anyone believe a man who claims that the Iraq war is as bad as the Holocaust? Is he insinuating that Americans have murdered 6 million Iraqis? What are the leftists trying to say? What the leftists are saying to our enemy is this: Islamic terrorists--here we are. America is weak and broken. You have won the war. Contact the leaders of the Democratic Party and let us know to whom we should submit our total surrender. Our only request is that you allow us to blame our shameful and total defeat on President Bush. If you allow us that one victory, the country is yours. ================================================== ========================= Anyone has the right to disagree with government policy. The First Amendment guarantees us that right. One could even plausibly argue that it is our patriotic duty to display our dissent. However, one can go to far, and slide from patriotic dissent right into out and out treason. People like Kerry, Kennedy, Dean, Pelosi, Schumer, Rangel, et al, however did not slide from dissent into treason, they actively took it up, and embraced their treason. Nor have they hidden their treason, but they claim it's just a disagreement with the president. John Kerry has practiced his treason since his college days, in a variety of ways. Howard Dean is so far out of touch with reality that a great many people doubt his sanity. Nevertheless, sane or insane, he continues to practice his treason. As do the others. Dissent is often a good thing. It's when it starts giving aid and comfort to those that want to destroy us, that treason rears it's evil head. Kerry, Kennedy, Dean, Pelosi et al, have embraced treason as a political statement, and stance. They belong in prison, not the halls of the Capitol. |
#2
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"knuckle dragging imbecile" wrote in message oups.com... When Does Free Speech Become Treason? The Fifth Column/Barbara Stock BIIIGG snip. Amen |
#3
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"Ignoramus19198" wrote in message .. . What you posted does not qualify as meaningful information. i True, but it does qualify as decent propaganda. The only thing wrong with it though is that it failed to use the word "victory" enough. According to the research Bush is getting from a Midwestern university the word victory has been shown to be highly impressive to the American public. Keep that in mind next time you hear from the Bush surrogates. Pay particular attention to how many times they use the word victory in their statements. It'll be a lot. Hawke |
#4
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article , Hawke says...
Pay particular attention to how many times they use the word victory in their statements. Ah, so I was correct. The spinmeisters realized that the US public wants pretty girls being kissed by servicemen in times square. VJ day. VE day. Now it's gonna be VI day. Any day now. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#5
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
We have the right to free speech as we have the right to bear arms. If you wish to take away one of those rights, then you allow the government to take away the other. "Dissent is often a good thing. " Dissent is ALWAYS a good thing. "It's when it starts giving aid and comfort to those that want to destroy us, that treason rears it's evil head. " This Administration has aided and comforted those who want to destroy us more than any Administration in the memory of this generation. Tell me, why does Karl Rove still have his security clearance? TMT |
#6
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 21:29:46 GMT, Ignoramus19198
wrote: What you posted does not qualify as meaningful information. i Actually..it does. However..Leftists will go into the full fetal position, and start sucking their thumbs when they realize that all the spew they have been emitting, has been Leftists lies from an organization that cares NOTHING about America, but only its return to a position of power. That is..the honest leftists..which is pretty much an oxymoron. If they were honest..they wouldnt be Leftists. Shrug Gunner "Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules. Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner |
#7
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
knuckle dragging imbecile wrote:
When Does Free Speech Become Treason? The Fifth Column/Barbara Stock SNIP Your chosen handle "knuckle dragging imbecile" is very appropriate. Abrasha http://www.abrasha.com |
#8
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article , Gunner Asch says...
However..Leftists will go into the full fetal position, and start sucking their thumbs when they realize that all the spew they have been emitting, has been Leftists lies from an organization that cares NOTHING about America, but only its return to a position of power. Hmm, 'cares nothing about america.' That maybe sounds like that guy from the Cato Institute, who was taking money from that guy Abromoff to write spin and call it research. They only care about the dollar it seems. Now what really drives me into the fetal position is knowing that our president told the NSA that it's just fine and dandy to wiretap US citizens without getting a warrant before doing so. Unfortunatly for him it seems like the powers that be in the senate aren't too happy about those shenanigans. Some of the republicans too, oddly enough. So unhappy in fact that they put the kibosh on that USAPATRIOT act to spank him a bit. Should we really be securing democtratic freedoms for the citizens of Iraq at the exact same time we're stripping them from US citizens? Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#9
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
On 17 Dec 2005 19:28:40 -0800, jim rozen
wrote: In article , Gunner Asch says... However..Leftists will go into the full fetal position, and start sucking their thumbs when they realize that all the spew they have been emitting, has been Leftists lies from an organization that cares NOTHING about America, but only its return to a position of power. Hmm, 'cares nothing about america.' That maybe sounds like that guy from the Cato Institute, who was taking money from that guy Abromoff to write spin and call it research. They only care about the dollar it seems. Now what really drives me into the fetal position is knowing that our president told the NSA that it's just fine and dandy to wiretap US citizens without getting a warrant before doing so. See FISA court. And 72 hours. Then get back to me, ok? Unfortunatly for him it seems like the powers that be in the senate aren't too happy about those shenanigans. Some of the republicans too, oddly enough. So unhappy in fact that they put the kibosh on that USAPATRIOT act to spank him a bit. Should we really be securing democtratic freedoms for the citizens of Iraq at the exact same time we're stripping them from US citizens? Jim They put the kibosh on him, based on fatally flawed (and intentionally spun) statements by the Anti-Bush bunch. Please read the PA in its entirety. Also note who signed and voted for it. Google FISA, Gorlick Wall, and Carnivore and Echelon. also "able danger" Then get back to me. A helping hint.... http://www.gulfcoastnews.com/GCNgues...competence.htm Gunner "Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules. Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner |
#10
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
You take one lousy week off to join Thorax at the Elvis concert, and this
is what happens: Gunner Asch writes on Sun, 18 Dec 2005 09:56:55 GMT in rec.crafts.metalworking : On 17 Dec 2005 19:28:40 -0800, jim rozen wrote: In article , Gunner Asch says... However..Leftists will go into the full fetal position, and start sucking their thumbs when they realize that all the spew they have been emitting, has been Leftists lies from an organization that cares NOTHING about America, but only its return to a position of power. Hmm, 'cares nothing about america.' That maybe sounds like that guy from the Cato Institute, who was taking money from that guy Abromoff to write spin and call it research. They only care about the dollar it seems. Now what really drives me into the fetal position is knowing that our president told the NSA that it's just fine and dandy to wiretap US citizens without getting a warrant before doing so. See FISA court. And 72 hours. Then get back to me, ok? What drives me nuts is the arrogance of the Time editorial board to reveal Government secrets, the revelation of which help no Americans, and warn America's enemies. Yet the Press continues to wonder why people don't buy their papers anymore, or why they can't get any respect from the rubes. tschus pyotr -- pyotr filipivich Most journalists these days couldn't investigate a missing chocolate cake at a pre-school without a Democrat office holder telling them what to look for, where, and what significance it all has. |
#11
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article , pyotr filipivich
says... What drives me nuts is the arrogance of the Time[s] editorial board to reveal Government secrets, What, like the fact that the NSA is wiretapping american citizens without a court order? Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#12
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
" What drives me nuts is the arrogance of the Time editorial board
to reveal Government secrets, the revelation of which help no Americans, and warn America's enemies" You have to be kidding....the fact that Dear Old George demanded wiretaps without having bothered to go through the courts for permission means he broke the law. This may very well be the beginning of the end for George....remember how Watergate got started? The fact that the renewal of the Patriot Act failed tells you that this is a very serious situation for the Administration. Meanwhile no one can tell me why Karl Rove who is still under investigation for turning over a CIA agent still has his security clearance during wartime....it must be nice to have low friends in high places. Damn hypocrites. Maybe George and Karl will be cellmates.... TMT |
#13
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message oups.com... The fact that the renewal of the Patriot Act failed tells you that this is a very serious situation for the Administration. I think that may have more to do with a election coming up than with any trouble that GW may be in. |
#14
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
... What drives me nuts is the arrogance of the Time editorial board to reveal Government secrets, the revelation of which help no Americans, and warn America's enemies. I'm going to be sorry I said this, but... 1) It was the New York Times editorial board, not Time. 2) It wasn't government secrets. It was information illegally being kept secret by the Executive branch. The legislative branch is up in arms about it, and the courts may yet be hearing criminal charges over it. 3) If you don't appreciate why violation of your Constitutional rights is a harm to you, you're living in the wrong country. 4) As for warning America's enemies, there is nothing the administration has been doing that it didn't have the legal means to do already -- if they had bothered to follow the law and the Constitution. Yet the Press continues to wonder why people don't buy their papers anymore, or why they can't get any respect from the rubes. The Times is doing OK for a newspaper in the Internet age. As for the rubes, they weren't buying it or reading it, anyway. -- Ed Huntress |
#15
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
" The fact that the renewal of the Patriot Act failed tells you that
this is a very serious situation for the Administration. I think that may have more to do with a election coming up than with any trouble that GW may be in." You are correct in that the GOP is in trouble...of their own making. And they just keep digging their hole deeper.... They are in damage control mode now. All tax cut legistration has been shelved, privatizing Social Security is dead, Alaska drilling is likely dead....as the money issues that would benefit the GOP contributors die, the chance of the GOP doing well in the 2006 elections die with them. Of course we have until 2008 to work on the national debt, national trade deficit, unemployment, Katrina, probable recession, Delay, the CIA leak and of course Iraq...never a dull moment when you have George leading the Sheeple over the cliff..... TMT |
#16
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
" The fact that the renewal of the Patriot Act failed tells you that this is a very serious situation for the Administration. I think that may have more to do with a election coming up than with any trouble that GW may be in." You are correct in that the GOP is in trouble...of their own making. And they just keep digging their hole deeper.... They are in damage control mode now. All tax cut legistration has been shelved, privatizing Social Security is dead, Alaska drilling is likely dead....as the money issues that would benefit the GOP contributors die, the chance of the GOP doing well in the 2006 elections die with them. Of course we have until 2008 to work on the national debt, national trade deficit, unemployment, Katrina, probable recession, Delay, the CIA leak and of course Iraq...never a dull moment when you have George leading the Sheeple over the cliff..... The President of the United States has committed , and now admitted, the commission of multiple felonies. He has also publicly stated his intention to commit additional illegal acts. You or I would be in jail had we done the same. He should be as well..... -- John R. Carroll Machining Solution Software, Inc. Los Angeles San Francisco www.machiningsolution.com |
#17
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article , Ed Huntress says...
... 3) If you don't appreciate why violation of your Constitutional rights is a harm to you, you're living in the wrong country. ... "America, Love it or Leave It." That's functionaly the same as: "The American Constitution, Obey it or Go To Jail." Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of lawbreakers. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#18
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article .com,
Too_Many_Tools says... They are in damage control mode now. All tax cut legistration has been shelved, privatizing Social Security is dead, Alaska drilling is likely dead....as the money issues that would benefit the GOP contributors die, the chance of the GOP doing well in the 2006 elections die with them. Of course we have until 2008 to work on the national debt, national trade deficit, unemployment, Katrina, probable recession, Delay, the CIA leak and of course Iraq...never a dull moment when you have George leading the Sheeple over the cliff..... You forgot the candy man, Mr. Abromoff. He's gonna rat them all out. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#19
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
Abrasha wrote: Your chosen handle "knuckle dragging imbecile" is very appropriate. Abrasha http://www.abrasha.com Well you know where that handle came from, don't you? One of your fellow name-callers in this liberal love fest. |
#20
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"knuckle dragging imbecile" wrote in message oups.com... Abrasha wrote: Your chosen handle "knuckle dragging imbecile" is very appropriate. Abrasha http://www.abrasha.com Well you know where that handle came from, don't you? One of your fellow name-callers in this liberal love fest. Everyone knows that you can't beat a right winger when it comes to name calling. The best you can hope for it to hold your own. Hawke |
#21
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
Hawke wrote: "knuckle dragging imbecile" wrote in message oups.com... Abrasha wrote: Your chosen handle "knuckle dragging imbecile" is very appropriate. Abrasha http://www.abrasha.com Well you know where that handle came from, don't you? One of your fellow name-callers in this liberal love fest. Everyone knows that you can't beat a right winger when it comes to name calling. The best you can hope for it to hold your own. Hawke In the words of a great American philosopher, "can't we all just get along?" |
#22
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
You take one lousy week off to join Thorax at the Elvis concert, and this
is what happens: jim rozen writes on 18 Dec 2005 14:46:46 -0800 in rec.crafts.metalworking : In article , pyotr filipivich says... What drives me nuts is the arrogance of the Time[s] editorial board to reveal Government secrets, What, like the fact that the NSA is wiretapping american citizens without a court order? Once again, the Times editorial board (et alia) are wanting to make sure that Dots are not collected, so that there will be no problem blaming the Government for not Connecting said uncollected Dots. I wonder if the editors have groked the difference between wire taps for collecting evidence, and wire taps for collecting intelligence. Maybe they can show what sort of crimes the September 11th hijackers had committed prior to their boarding their flights. While we are at it, what legalistic reason would there have been to take note of the Oklahoma City bomber - who managed to only blow himself up. -- pyotr filipivich TV NEWS: Yesterday's newspaper read to the illiterate. |
#23
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article , pyotr filipivich
says... I wonder if the editors have groked the difference between wire taps for collecting evidence, and wire taps for collecting intelligence. Odd, I checked the fourth amendment. Those idiots who wrote the damn thing didn't understand that difference either. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#24
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
4th Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Yep, I see it. It says right there that international phone calls to Al Qaida-connected people shall not be monitored in time of war (unless a court has taken the time to approve it, of course). |
#25
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
Show me where it says anything about being secure in your speech???
-- Clif "G.W." wrote in message oups.com... 4th Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Yep, I see it. It says right there that international phone calls to Al Qaida-connected people shall not be monitored in time of war (unless a court has taken the time to approve it, of course). |
#26
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
Ok, so maybe the 4th Amendment didn't really say that international
phone calls to Al Qaida-connected people shall not be monitored but I'll bet some judge somewhere will say it did. |
#27
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"G.W." wrote in message
oups.com... 4th Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Yep, I see it. It says right there that international phone calls to Al Qaida-connected people shall not be monitored in time of war (unless a court has taken the time to approve it, of course). Sorry, G.W., but "to be secure in your person" means the government can't invade your privacy without cause -- including your phone calls. It's a little bit like the way we apply the 2nd Amendment today. The FF's were talking about muzzle-loading, flintlock muskets only. But most people here would expand the defininition of "arms," much like we have expanded the defininition of "secure in your person." New technology requires us to consider how the *principle* applies to the new conditions. As for "Al Qaeda-connected people," as a former administration lawyer explained yesterday, all they know in most cases is that somebody accused of being Al Qaeda had their phone number on a computer database -- or that somebody on the database had called them. There can be several degrees of separation. It could have been their manicurist when they visited the US, and the person whose phone is being tapped could turn out to be the manicurist's bookie. g -- Ed Huntress |
#28
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
Ed Huntress wrote: Sorry, G.W., but "to be secure in your person" means the government can't invade your privacy without cause -- including your phone calls. It's a little bit like the way we apply the 2nd Amendment today. The FF's were talking about muzzle-loading, flintlock muskets only. But most people here would expand the defininition of "arms," much like we have expanded the defininition of "secure in your person." New technology requires us to consider how the *principle* applies to the new conditions. As for "Al Qaeda-connected people," as a former administration lawyer explained yesterday, all they know in most cases is that somebody accused of being Al Qaeda had their phone number on a computer database -- or that somebody on the database had called them. There can be several degrees of separation. It could have been their manicurist when they visited the US, and the person whose phone is being tapped could turn out to be the manicurist's bookie. g -- Ed Huntress I agree, for the most part, but I just hope that when we are "expanding the definition" of the Constitution that we don't take it too far. For example, the idea that "free speech" equals pornography. Maybe that idea was expanded a tiny bit too far. |
#29
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
G.W. wrote:
Ed Huntress wrote: Sorry, G.W., but "to be secure in your person" means the government can't invade your privacy without cause -- including your phone calls. It's a little bit like the way we apply the 2nd Amendment today. The FF's were talking about muzzle-loading, flintlock muskets only. But most people here would expand the defininition of "arms," much like we have expanded the defininition of "secure in your person." New technology requires us to consider how the *principle* applies to the new conditions. As for "Al Qaeda-connected people," as a former administration lawyer explained yesterday, all they know in most cases is that somebody accused of being Al Qaeda had their phone number on a computer database -- or that somebody on the database had called them. There can be several degrees of separation. It could have been their manicurist when they visited the US, and the person whose phone is being tapped could turn out to be the manicurist's bookie. g -- Ed Huntress I agree, for the most part, but I just hope that when we are "expanding the definition" of the Constitution that we don't take it too far. For example, the idea that "free speech" equals pornography. Maybe that idea was expanded a tiny bit too far. G.W., You can't legistlate morality. Be a better parent. What better opportunity is there to teach proper moral behavior is there? I do realize that many parents are simply to lazy or irresponsible to be of much use as parents but that's the only real answer and it's also the whole problem. The same is true for abortion and other like issues. Making this illegal won't appreciably reduce demand. If you want to reduce demand bring kids up not to "demand" the things in the first place. As long as that demand exists a supply will be at hand. That may outrage some but the facts remain outrage or no... -- John R. Carroll Machining Solution Software, Inc. Los Angeles San Francisco www.machiningsolution.com |
#30
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article .com, G.W. says...
4th Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Yep, I see it. It says right there that international phone calls to Al Qaida-connected people shall not be monitored in time of war (unless a court has taken the time to approve it, of course). The current adminstration *tried* to ask congress for the ability to do warrentless wiretapping on citizens in the US. They were not allowed to this. The answer was "NO." It also doesn't say "GW's house cannot be searched without a warrant." So your house can now be entered and searched by the police, at any time, without them having to obtain a warrant from a judge. Right? You've just given up your rights under the fourth amendment, and you didn't even know it. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#31
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
John R. Carroll wrote:
G.W., You can't legistlate morality. Be a better parent. What better opportunity is there to teach proper moral behavior is there? I do realize that many parents are simply to lazy or irresponsible to be of much use as parents but that's the only real answer and it's also the whole problem. The same is true for abortion and other like issues. Making this illegal won't appreciably reduce demand. If you want to reduce demand bring kids up not to "demand" the things in the first place. As long as that demand exists a supply will be at hand. That may outrage some but the facts remain outrage or no... Ok, I can go along with that up to a point. Raising moral children is a good solution. On the other hand, you still don't want to live in a society that has absolutely no limits. I don't think we need a whore house on every corner under some bogus idea of "free speech". Sensible limits should be set by our elected representatives not by some judge who misinterprets the Constitution. That's only my opinion. |
#32
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
jim rozen wrote:
In article .com, G.W. says... The current adminstration *tried* to ask congress for the ability to do warrentless wiretapping on citizens in the US. They were not allowed to this. The answer was "NO." Our entire society ( American ) is based on the premise that we would rather let the guilty go free in a pinch rather than sacrifice the governments burden to prove guilt. That is where "beyond a reasonable doubt" comes in. THIS is what's wrong with things like the Patriot Act and warrantless searches. The presumption of innocence goes out the window in advance of any process. The Constitution either means something or it doesn't. It, and our laws, either applies equally or they don't. The term "Fighting for Our Freedoms" means Americans are willing to bear the associated burden, die even. It's worth the price of liberty to do so. FULL STOP. Our country is being altered in very fundamental ways and I can't believe it's going to fly. It probably is, I just can't believe it. -- John R. Carroll Machining Solution Software, Inc. Los Angeles San Francisco www.machiningsolution.com |
#33
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
jim rozen wrote: The current adminstration *tried* to ask congress for the ability to do warrentless wiretapping on citizens in the US. They were not allowed to this. The answer was "NO." It also doesn't say "GW's house cannot be searched without a warrant." So your house can now be entered and searched by the police, at any time, without them having to obtain a warrant from a judge. Right? You've just given up your rights under the fourth amendment, and you didn't even know it. Jim Well, of course nobody wants the government "spying" on them but I'd dare say that if we had another major Al Qaida attack and it was found that the government was purposely Not monitoring communication of overseas calls with Al Qaida suspects, there would be another round of calls for impeachment. Nobody is talking about breaking into anyone's house without a search warrant. I could be wrong but I thought it was all about communications to other countries with people suspected of having something to do with terrorists. I also thought that the information found could not be used in court, so if your French bookie called you there would be no worry. GW |
#34
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
G.W. wrote:
John R. Carroll wrote: G.W., You can't legistlate morality. Be a better parent. What better opportunity is there to teach proper moral behavior is there? I do realize that many parents are simply to lazy or irresponsible to be of much use as parents but that's the only real answer and it's also the whole problem. The same is true for abortion and other like issues. Making this illegal won't appreciably reduce demand. If you want to reduce demand bring kids up not to "demand" the things in the first place. As long as that demand exists a supply will be at hand. That may outrage some but the facts remain outrage or no... Ok, I can go along with that up to a point. Raising moral children is a good solution. On the other hand, you still don't want to live in a society that has absolutely no limits. I don't think we need a whore house on every corner under some bogus idea of "free speech". Absent significant demand you wouldn't have such. No Bucks - No Buck Rogers :) I do, however, agree that clear limits need to be in place. THAT problem is legistlative. -- John R. Carroll Machining Solution Software, Inc. Los Angeles San Francisco www.machiningsolution.com |
#35
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
John R. Carroll wrote: Our entire society ( American ) is based on the premise that we would rather let the guilty go free in a pinch rather than sacrifice the governments burden to prove guilt. That is where "beyond a reasonable doubt" comes in. THIS is what's wrong with things like the Patriot Act and warrantless searches. The presumption of innocence goes out the window in advance of any process. The Constitution either means something or it doesn't. It, and our laws, either applies equally or they don't. The term "Fighting for Our Freedoms" means Americans are willing to bear the associated burden, die even. It's worth the price of liberty to do so. I agree that letting a guilty person go free might be better than losing our freedom but what the uproar is all about is not that. It's about possibly missing a chance to stop a major attack which could result in a potential huge loss of life. Nobody is breaking into houses. The phone calls monitored are overseas with suspected terrorists or their friends. Maybe mistakes will be made but to not try could be worse. GW |
#36
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
G.W. wrote:
John R. Carroll wrote: I agree that letting a guilty person go free might be better than losing our freedom but what the uproar is all about is not that. It is the trade off that the Founding Fathers and their fellow citizens knowingly and purposefully chose to make. It isn't the goal to free the guilty, but to protect the innocent. Even if those innocent are hateful or disgusting. Disgusting isn't either illegal or actionable. It's about possibly missing a chance to stop a major attack which could result in a potential huge loss of life. I guess this is where we part company. I would rather eliminate the root cause or at least resolve the situation to the point that our enemies either fear the repercussions or stop wanting to attack violently. Nobody is breaking into houses. . See "Sneak and Peak" and get back to me. My definition of "breaking in" is unauthorized entry or entry and search absent notification or a warrant, even if that entry is with a key. The phone calls monitored are overseas with suspected terrorists or their friends. Maybe mistakes will be made but to not try could be worse. What is in fact happening today is that the government is scooping it all across a broad spectrum and THEN deciding what to do. Point of isn't considered at all except that the collection is no longer limited in any way territorially or nationality wise. Where we seem to differ is in the "what to try" department. I'd like to try the things that will remove the threat more permanently. Treat the disease, if you will, at gunpoint or not. Whatever works. Your position, if you will think for a moment, is to condone treating the symptom while ignoring the disease. I am not sure either of us is "right". In fact, I am not even sure there is a "right" answer. What I am sure of is that sacrificing what has been won at such tremendous cost would be, and is, wrong. Standing by our founding principals is the only thing to do regardless. What's left to defend if we don't? -- John R. Carroll Machining Solution Software, Inc. Los Angeles San Francisco www.machiningsolution.com |
#37
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"G.W." wrote in message
oups.com... Ed Huntress wrote: Sorry, G.W., but "to be secure in your person" means the government can't invade your privacy without cause -- including your phone calls. It's a little bit like the way we apply the 2nd Amendment today. The FF's were talking about muzzle-loading, flintlock muskets only. But most people here would expand the defininition of "arms," much like we have expanded the defininition of "secure in your person." New technology requires us to consider how the *principle* applies to the new conditions. As for "Al Qaeda-connected people," as a former administration lawyer explained yesterday, all they know in most cases is that somebody accused of being Al Qaeda had their phone number on a computer database -- or that somebody on the database had called them. There can be several degrees of separation. It could have been their manicurist when they visited the US, and the person whose phone is being tapped could turn out to be the manicurist's bookie. g -- Ed Huntress I agree, for the most part, but I just hope that when we are "expanding the definition" of the Constitution that we don't take it too far. For example, the idea that "free speech" equals pornography. Maybe that idea was expanded a tiny bit too far. There we can agree as well. Doubtless it was political speech that they intended to protect. In general, I'm pleased that the idea has been expanded. There are limits, but I think long and hard before I decide upon favoring one. -- Ed Huntress |
#38
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
. com... G.W., You can't legistlate morality. Feeling contrary today, I'm going to agree with Robert Bork on this one and say that ALL legislation is legislation of morality. We make laws to distinguish what we think is right from wrong; morality is the distinction between right and wrong; all legislation is about morality. I think what you're referring to here is primarily sexual behavior, maybe with some social behavior added in. We effectively legislate against many aspects of those things on which there is a large consensus. On others, the consensus breaks down, and the laws are largely or partially ignored. -- Ed Huntress |
#39
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message . com... G.W., You can't legistlate morality. Feeling contrary today, I'm going to agree with Robert Bork on this one and say that ALL legislation is legislation of morality. We make laws to distinguish what we think is right from wrong; morality is the distinction between right and wrong; all legislation is about morality. Borking me are you! That's novel. How many people can say they've been Borked by Ed Huntress? LOL There is truth in that but the law flows from the constitution not the other way around. We are, after all, discussing the Federal interest here and not the State's. I think what you're referring to here is primarily sexual behavior, maybe with some social behavior added in. We effectively legislate against many aspects of those things on which there is a large consensus. On others, the consensus breaks down, and the laws are largely or partially ignored. Yes Ed, they are ignored. There is no fundamental principal involved. This is results in a lack of respect for the law and has lead to the enormous influence of small but influential groups of advocates of particular points of view beyond the broader consensus. -- John R. Carroll Machining Solution Software, Inc. Los Angeles San Francisco www.machiningsolution.com |
#40
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
For Gunner
In article .com, G.W. says...
I agree that letting a guilty person go free might be better than losing our freedom but what the uproar is all about is not that. It is EXACTLY about that, sir. If you eliminate the fourth amendment 'just when they really need to' then you have eliminated it for everyone, for all time. You might as well just spool off the other 9 parts of the bill of rights and light them on fire too. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|