(Cliff) wrote in message ...
http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/newsroom/re...bjID=voIhFcHkG
R&Content=421

"President Bush's moves toward a network of detention centers€”a system
without accountability, which flouted U.S. and international law ..."

"The human rights catastrophe that is the Bush administrations current
foreign policy will be the stuff of analysis for centuries to come .. "

Gunner & the Libertarians, so concerend about their guns, should
love http://ccr-ny.org/v2/home.asp .....

Did people held in Guantánamo get lawyers & "due process"? Nope.

They get "military panels" and a "personal representative" (NOT
a lawyer and NOT representing them) (actually an assigned "military officer"
but that they may not even be told) (who reports on all up the chain of
"command", kind of in drag).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo...256578,00.html

"How the administration is obstructing the Supreme Court's terror decisions."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2104715/

"Law is easier if you don't allow lawyers"
"It is a meaningless joke, ..."
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...x.ssf?/base/ed
itorial/10917934977660.xml

"Pentagon seeks way around high court on Guantanamo detainees"
[
The US government of President George W. Bush is "anxious clearly to get the
process in place before things started to heat up in the federal court
litigation,"
....
However US officials have not released names, nor have they charged the
detainees with any crimes, nor allowed them access to lawyers. Because the
detainees are considered enemy combatants and not prisoners of war, US
officials said, they are not protected by the Geneva Convention.
....
"They are clearly unwilling to allow federal judges to decide these cases. The
only reason they would not want federal judges to make these decisions is that
they believe the federal judges would rule against them," he said.
]
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040711072526.2uz6ls53.html

This one was good too but is a bit earlier (February 20, 2004) ....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo...152345,00.html
[
This month the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said a board would
conduct an annual review of each case. But of the four-man panel, one member,
Edward Biester is a friend of Mr Rumsfeld, with whom he has had property
dealings. Two others, William Coleman and Griffin Bell, advised Mr Rumsfeld on
the original decision to establish the controversial tribunals.
]

As long as there is no bias .... and no lawyers ... and no actual courts or
judges ... or rule of law ....

Some kind soul reminded me that there were .....
--
Cliff

(Cliff) wrote

|| "President Bush's moves toward a network of detention centers€”a system
|| without accountability, which flouted U.S. and international law ..."

|| Did people held in Guantánamo get lawyers & "due process"? Nope.
||
|| They get "military panels" and a "personal representative" (NOT
|| a lawyer and NOT representing them) (actually an assigned "military officer"
|| but that they may not even be told) (who reports on all up the chain of
|| "command", kind of in drag).

What's the big deal here? Our constitution and the processes it specifies
applies to U.S. citizens accused of a crime. Not captured enemy combatants who
are citizens of other countries.

As for the Geneva Convention, it is binding only to the extent that both
sides of a given conflict agree to abide by it. Obviously, the other side can't
even spell "Geneva".

So the governing process in our treatment of these people is mostly
determined by our relationship with the nations which spawned these animals. And
those nations are not pleading for the return of these cherished citizens. If
the roles were reversed and Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia were holding 100's of
U.S. citiezens, we'd be dispatching the fleet right now to press for their
release.
Texas Parts Guy

Rex B wrote:
(Cliff) wrote

|| "President Bush's moves toward a network of detention centers€”a system
|| without accountability, which flouted U.S. and international law ..."

|| Did people held in Guantánamo get lawyers & "due process"? Nope.
||
|| They get "military panels" and a "personal representative" (NOT
|| a lawyer and NOT representing them) (actually an assigned "military officer"
|| but that they may not even be told) (who reports on all up the chain of
|| "command", kind of in drag).

What's the big deal here? Our constitution and the processes it specifies
applies to U.S. citizens accused of a crime. Not captured enemy combatants who
are citizens of other countries.

As for the Geneva Convention, it is binding only to the extent that both
sides of a given conflict agree to abide by it. Obviously, the other side can't
even spell "Geneva".

So the governing process in our treatment of these people is mostly
determined by our relationship with the nations which spawned these animals. And
those nations are not pleading for the return of these cherished citizens. If
the roles were reversed and Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia were holding 100's of
U.S. citiezens, we'd be dispatching the fleet right now to press for their
release.
Texas Parts Guy

The big deal is that THIS ALSO APPLIES TO AMERICAN CITIZENS, thanks to
the "Patriot" Act!! All they have to do is classify you as an enemy
combatant, and this classification is entirely arbitrary and not subject
to any court review. They could classify anyone who has ever posted to
misc.survivalism as an e.c. and it's bye-bye constitution...but they
would never do that now would they............

Bob

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:28:09 -0500, Bob Robinson
wrote:

||Rex B wrote:
|| (Cliff) wrote
||
|| || "President Bush's moves toward a network of detention centers€”a
system
|| || without accountability, which flouted U.S. and international law ..."
||
|| || Did people held in Guantánamo get lawyers & "due process"? Nope.
|| ||
|| || They get "military panels" and a "personal representative" (NOT
|| || a lawyer and NOT representing them) (actually an assigned "military
officer"
|| || but that they may not even be told) (who reports on all up the chain of
|| || "command", kind of in drag).
||
|| What's the big deal here? Our constitution and the processes it specifies
|| applies to U.S. citizens accused of a crime. Not captured enemy combatants
who
|| are citizens of other countries.
||
|| As for the Geneva Convention, it is binding only to the extent that both
|| sides of a given conflict agree to abide by it. Obviously, the other side
can't
|| even spell "Geneva".
||
|| So the governing process in our treatment of these people is mostly
|| determined by our relationship with the nations which spawned these animals.
And
|| those nations are not pleading for the return of these cherished citizens.
If
|| the roles were reversed and Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia were holding 100's
of
|| U.S. citiezens, we'd be dispatching the fleet right now to press for their
|| release.
|| Texas Parts Guy
||
||The big deal is that THIS ALSO APPLIES TO AMERICAN CITIZENS, thanks to
||the "Patriot" Act!! All they have to do is classify you as an enemy
||combatant, and this classification is entirely arbitrary and not subject
||to any court review. They could classify anyone who has ever posted to
||misc.survivalism as an e.c. and it's bye-bye constitution...but they
||would never do that now would they............

The courts covered that with Padilla, as they should have.
The Feds did not get away with it. The system works

Texas Parts Guy

BINGO

(Rex B) wrote in
:

(Cliff) wrote

|| "President Bush's moves toward a network of detention
|| centers€”a system
|| without accountability, which flouted U.S. and
|| international law ..."

|| Did people held in Guantánamo get lawyers & "due
|| process"? Nope.
||
|| They get "military panels" and a "personal
|| representative" (NOT
|| a lawyer and NOT representing them) (actually an
|| assigned "military officer" but that they may not even
|| be told) (who reports on all up the chain of "command",
|| kind of in drag).

What's the big deal here? Our constitution and the
processes it specifies applies to U.S. citizens accused of
a crime. Not captured enemy combatants who are citizens of
other countries.

True enough. They can't shoot the enemy combatants until they
are given a tribunal of three senior officers. The only facts
that need to be established in order for a death sentance to be
passed is that 1) they were combatants and 2) They were captured
out of uniform.

There is no need to release them until Al Qaeda surrenders, so
holding them isn't even an issue.

Liberal left wing America hating Democrats want to let them go,
of course. Some of those who have been let go have already been
recaptured, I've heard.

As for the Geneva Convention, it is binding only to the
extent that both
sides of a given conflict agree to abide by it. Obviously,
the other side can't even spell "Geneva".

Actually, anyone who signs up to the GC has to abide by it,
regardless of how the other side acts.


So the governing process in our treatment of these
people is mostly
determined by our relationship with the nations which
spawned these animals. And those nations are not pleading
for the return of these cherished citizens. If the roles
were reversed and Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia were holding
100's of U.S. citiezens, we'd be dispatching the fleet
right now to press for their release.
Texas Parts Guy

Cliff Huprich wrote:

(Cliff) wrote in message ...

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/newsroom/re...bjID=voIhFcHkG
R&Content=421

"President Bush's moves toward a network of detention centers€”a system
without accountability, which flouted U.S. and international law ..."

"The human rights catastrophe that is the Bush administrations current
foreign policy will be the stuff of analysis for centuries to come .. "

Gunner & the Libertarians, so concerend about their guns, should
love http://ccr-ny.org/v2/home.asp .....

Did people held in Guantánamo get lawyers & "due process"? Nope.

Did the people held from talking out against the war (Civil War) (Lincoln jailed whom ever talked out) ???....
Did people held from (lived from ?) the Bay of Pigs get lawyers and "due process" ? Nope.

Life isn't fair - the bad guys typically have more rights than the good guy.

Martin
--
Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder

[stuff deleted]

||||The big deal is that THIS ALSO APPLIES TO AMERICAN CITIZENS, thanks to
||||the "Patriot" Act!! All they have to do is classify you as an enemy
||||combatant, and this classification is entirely arbitrary and not subject
||||to any court review. They could classify anyone who has ever posted to
||||misc.survivalism as an e.c. and it's bye-bye constitution...but they
||||would never do that now would they............
||
||The courts covered that with Padilla, as they should have.
||The Feds did not get away with it. The system works
||
||If the system worked, there wouldn't be a 'Patriot Act'.

I see the Patriot Act as an alternative to marshal law.
In past wars where the mainland was considered to be at risk, marshall law was
pretty much in effect during the entire conflict. These days we don't actually
declare war, so a less drastic alternative was put in place.

The rest of those points are a bit out of context. Our system of government and
the people who we elect to govern us are not without flaws, but they do a pretty
good job for the most part. Not to say they don't bear watching.

Texas Parts Guy

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:22:41 GMT, (Rex B) wrote:

[stuff deleted]

||||The big deal is that THIS ALSO APPLIES TO AMERICAN CITIZENS, thanks to
||||the "Patriot" Act!! All they have to do is classify you as an enemy
||||combatant, and this classification is entirely arbitrary and not subject
||||to any court review. They could classify anyone who has ever posted to
||||misc.survivalism as an e.c. and it's bye-bye constitution...but they
||||would never do that now would they............
||
||The courts covered that with Padilla, as they should have.
||The Feds did not get away with it. The system works
||
||If the system worked, there wouldn't be a 'Patriot Act'.

I see the Patriot Act as an alternative to marshal law.
In past wars where the mainland was considered to be at risk, marshall law was
pretty much in effect during the entire conflict. These days we don't actually
declare war, so a less drastic alternative was put in place.

The rest of those points are a bit out of context. Our system of government and
the people who we elect to govern us are not without flaws, but they do a pretty
good job for the most part. Not to say they don't bear watching.

Texas Parts Guy

Indeed. Under Martial G Law..it would be far worse. The big
objections we hear about are due in large part to "what MIGHT happen"
under the PA, not as a result of any wide spread or even very small
numbers of abuse.

Even I get spooky when thinking of what Hillarybitch MIGHT do if she
had her hands on the PA.

Gunner

"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

||I see the Patriot Act as an alternative to marshal law.

||Indeed. Under Martial G Law..it would be far worse.

I can't believe I typed that
Texas Parts Guy

Even I get spooky when thinking of what Hillarybitch MIGHT do if she
had her hands on the PA.

I wouldn't worry about her, Hell, she won't even touch billdo's pecker!

"MarkC" wrote in message
...
Even I get spooky when thinking of what Hillarybitch MIGHT do if she
had her hands on the PA.

I wouldn't worry about her, Hell, she won't even touch billdo's pecker!



http://videosrv.fun4fun.com/public_html/Anim/1.mpeg

--

SVL

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"MarkC" wrote in message
...
Even I get spooky when thinking of what Hillarybitch MIGHT do if she
had her hands on the PA.

I wouldn't worry about her, Hell, she won't even touch billdo's pecker!



http://videosrv.fun4fun.com/public_html/Anim/1.mpeg

Looks like a 5-Starr game to me!!!

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:59:31 -0400, "MarkC"
wrote:

Even I get spooky when thinking of what Hillarybitch MIGHT do if she
had her hands on the PA.

I wouldn't worry about her, Hell, she won't even touch billdo's pecker!

Worry or not..when she took the job of Master at Arms for Dykes on
Bikes, I had some concerns about any mans safety in her area.
Hell..look what happened to Vince Foster when he crossed her.

Gunner

"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

Hell..look what happened to Vince Foster when he crossed her.

My man Vince. Let's see, fully dressed, single gsw to the head, body
totally drained of blood, body laying in repose, as if at attention, only
horizontal with gun still in hand at his side, no bullet found, no blood or
body part spray on the surrounding ground, no blood in the soil or on
clothing...yep, sounds like a suicide to me.

"MarkC" wrote in message
...
Hell..look what happened to Vince Foster when he crossed her.

My man Vince. Let's see, fully dressed, single gsw to the head, body
totally drained of blood, body laying in repose, as if at attention, only
horizontal with gun still in hand at his side, no bullet found, no blood
or
body part spray on the surrounding ground, no blood in the soil or on
clothing...yep, sounds like a suicide to me.


Can you provide a link to the actual coroner's report ?

--

SVL

Strabo wrote in
:

In OT - Bush *ignores* Supreme Court's rulings .. on
Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:23:07 GMT, by Stuart Grey, we read:

(Rex B) wrote in
:

(Cliff) wrote

|| "President Bush's moves toward a network of
|| detention centers—a system
|| without accountability, which flouted U.S. and
|| international law ..."

|| Did people held in Guantánamo get lawyers & "due
|| process"? Nope.
||
|| They get "military panels" and a "personal
|| representative" (NOT
|| a lawyer and NOT representing them) (actually an
|| assigned "military officer" but that they may not even
|| be told) (who reports on all up the chain of
|| "command", kind of in drag).

What's the big deal here? Our constitution and the
processes it specifies applies to U.S. citizens accused
of a crime. Not captured enemy combatants who are
citizens of other countries.

True enough. They can't shoot the enemy combatants until
they are given a tribunal of three senior officers. The
only facts that need to be established in order for a death
sentence to be passed is that 1) they were combatants and
2) They were captured out of uniform.

As per the Patriot Act, none of those are necessary.

I know what parts of the UCMJ and GCs say that enemy
combatants can be kept for the duration of the war, and that
if they don't meet the requirements for POW - that is, among
other requirements, that they follow a leader (thus will obey
the order to surrender) and they must have been in uniform
when captured they can be shot.

But please tell cite the sections of the Patriot act that says
that this is not necessary. I suspect you're overstating the
case against the Patriot act and trying to whip up hysteria
against the Patriot act.

Or more bluntly, I suspect either you're spreading bull**** or
are regurgitating bull**** you've been fed.

You could simply be made to disappear and never be heard
of. Anyone with any knowledge of this 'detention' would be
prohibited by law from speaking about it.

The GCs do say that in cases of national security, an enemy
combatant, particularly one out of uniform, can be held
without making it known that the enemy has been captured.
Simply put, enemies that do not wear uniforms and do not
follow the laws and customs of warfare do not get the rights
afforded to POWs.

This is a GOOD thing, as terrorist are evil *******s who do
not deserve these rights.

Strabo wrote in
:

In OT - Bush *ignores* Supreme Court's rulings .. on
Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:33:37 GMT, by Stuart Grey, we read:

Snip irrelevant stuff and irrational unsupported gibber of a
raving anti-American loon

Here is the law:


SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title
18,
United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by
assassination
or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction,
assassination, or kidnapping';

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end
and
inserting `; and'; and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities
that--

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a
violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any
State;

`(B) appear to be intended--

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation
or coercion; or

`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction
of
the United States.'.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18,
United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or
international terrorism as defined in section
2331;'.

++++++++++++++

My Comments:

Terrorism then is any activity that may:

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a
violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any
State;

...or an act that may:
`(B) appear to be intended--

Why do you lie? there is no "or" between sections (A) and (B)
of Title 18, Section 2331.5. You added that!

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or

`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction
of the United States.'.

Which could apply to any criticism of government or
politicians or half of the material on the NGs.

The qualifications of Section (A) must also apply; it must be
a criminal act. Your silly anti-American prattle does not
qualify as domestic terrorism. Now, if you blow up a building
to try and change public opinion THAT would qualify.

Note the wording for amending Section 3077(1) of title 18,
United States Code, it is is amended to read:

`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or
international terrorism as defined in section 2331;'.

Which effectively means that "domestic" terrorism is the
same as "international" terrorism.

Are you really that stupid? What this says is that terrorism
is the superset containing both domestic terrorism and
international terrorism. The difference being that domestic
terrorism occurs within the US and international terrorism
does not.

What's so bad about that anyway?!



Further as we see in Sec.411 below, a terrorist is ...

This defines a "foreign terrorist organization", not a
terrorist. Can't you read?

`(aa) a foreign terrorist organization, as designated by
the
Secretary of State under section 219, or

`(bb) a political, social or other similar group whose
public
endorsement of acts of terrorist activity the
Secretary of State has determined undermines United
States efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist
activities,';


Summary - A terrorist is any person suspected of violating
any federal or state criminal law OR any person suspected
of actually or intending to, intimidate or coerce any
person.

Your summary once again does not match what the law says.
Further, this section is about who can immigrate to the United
States. It says members of terrorist organizations can't come
here. No violation of anyone's rights in this section, as
there is no right for aliens to come to the United States.
We’ve long had provisions keeping known Nazis out of the
country. Terrorist who are here to kill us are even worse. No
big deal here.

snip


Yes, There Is Also A Secret Court


NYTIMES 27 Aug 2002

snip garbage from the New York Times.

Please stick to objective evidence and not the prattle of the
America hating socialist pigs at the New York Times.

snip more distortions quoted from other America haters

Use the act itself! I don't care about YOUR interpretation
because you've gotten it wrong every time you tried to
understand the law. Nor do I give a damn about the people who
write your talking points sheets for you.

So, what you got is your socialist buddies saying you're
right, and a couple of sections of the U.S.C. that you don't
even understand.

That's pretty much what I expected. Nothing substantial in
your argument, but I did have hope that you might educate me.
Boy, I must learn sooner or later that there is such an
immense pile of BS from you liberals, that it's not worth
looking.


Have a nice day.

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"MarkC" wrote in message
...
Hell..look what happened to Vince Foster when he crossed her.

My man Vince. Let's see, fully dressed, single gsw to the head, body
totally drained of blood, body laying in repose, as if at attention,
only
horizontal with gun still in hand at his side, no bullet found, no blood
or
body part spray on the surrounding ground, no blood in the soil or on
clothing...yep, sounds like a suicide to me.


Can you provide a link to the actual coroner's report ?

Was there one? It's been a long time ago, the boy's bones are most likely
dust now, as well as any real report.

"MarkC" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"MarkC" wrote in message
...
Hell..look what happened to Vince Foster when he crossed her.

My man Vince. Let's see, fully dressed, single gsw to the head, body
totally drained of blood, body laying in repose, as if at attention,
only
horizontal with gun still in hand at his side, no bullet found, no
blood
or
body part spray on the surrounding ground, no blood in the soil or on
clothing...yep, sounds like a suicide to me.


Can you provide a link to the actual coroner's report ?

Was there one? It's been a long time ago, the boy's bones are most likely
dust now, as well as any real report.

Yeah, there was one. And a House committee analysis of it. And over 400
cut-and-paste lies about it on the Web, originally written by someone who
was guessing and then picked up by every neo-fascist blog on Earth.

Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it. g

Ed Huntress

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it. g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust on his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

Gunner

"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except
in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism
proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is
merely the difference between murder and suicide."
- Ayn Rand, from "Foreign Policy Drains U.S. of Main
Weapons"

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it. g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust on his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

What blood spatters, brain matter, etc.? No blogs now. No quotes from
right-wing editorialists. Just tell us what you know yourself, and how you
know it.

All official sources have said it was a suicide. If you have evidence to the
contrary, please identify what wasn't presented in the police or coronor's
reports, and your theories about why it wasn't presented. g

This case has become a good test for sanity versus conspiracy paranoia. I'll
be very interested in what you've come up with.

Ed Huntress

"Rex B" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:28:09 -0500, Bob Robinson
wrote:

||Rex B wrote:
|| (Cliff) wrote
||
|| || "President Bush's moves toward a network of detention
centers?"a
system

Snipty snip-
|| || without accountability, which flouted U.S. and international law
...."
have.
The Feds did not get away with it. The system works

Texas Parts Guy

The really important thing to remember here is that THEY TRIED to get away
with it!
How does that quote 'vigilance is the price of democracy' go?
They wasted the court's time and the money of American taxpayers to test the
water and they will do it again and again until someone really puts the foot
down..................
The patriot act was billed as non-threatening unless one was a genuine
terrorist. The actions of the authorities has been anything but 'in the
spirit' of said act.
That said I would like to think that if Bush had been the Prime Minister of
Canada his administration would have been 'outta here' long before the real
damage could have been done. It boggles the mind that *any* of the
electorate in the USA still support this dangerous person/adminstration.
(sorry Gunner; but your continued praise of this moron reveals a serious
disconnection with reality; but to be fair, you are far from alone.)
Regards.
Ken (now, probably, on _all_ the (official) ****lists.

In article . 17,
Stuart Grey writes:

Are you really that stupid? What this says is that terrorism
is the superset containing both domestic terrorism and
international terrorism. The difference being that domestic
terrorism occurs within the US and international terrorism
does not.

Both the Pentagon and the WTC were inside the US ....

HTH the reading & map impaired wingers
--
Cliff

In article , Cliff Huprich
says...

In article . 17,
Stuart Grey writes:

Are you really that stupid? What this says is that terrorism
is the superset containing both domestic terrorism and
international terrorism. The difference being that domestic
terrorism occurs within the US and international terrorism
does not.

Both the Pentagon and the WTC were inside the US ....

HTH the reading & map impaired wingers

I think the lines are blurring a bit. How come we have
the FBI galavanting all over the globe chasing snipes?

Call those guys back home where they belong.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:32:13 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it. g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust on his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

What blood spatters, brain matter, etc.? No blogs now. No quotes from
right-wing editorialists. Just tell us what you know yourself, and how you
know it.

I asked you first.

All official sources have said it was a suicide. If you have evidence to the
contrary, please identify what wasn't presented in the police or coronor's
reports, and your theories about why it wasn't presented. g

Who killed JFK? Officially it was LHO.

This case has become a good test for sanity versus conspiracy paranoia. I'll
be very interested in what you've come up with.

U first.

Gunner

Ed Huntress


"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except
in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism
proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is
merely the difference between murder and suicide."
- Ayn Rand, from "Foreign Policy Drains U.S. of Main
Weapons"

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:47:26 -0700, "Ken Davey"
wrote:

(sorry Gunner; but your continued praise of this moron reveals a serious
disconnection with reality; but to be fair, you are far from alone.)
Regards.
Ken (now, probably, on _all_ the (official) ****lists.

and from my perspective, yours reveals a serious disconnect with
reality, but to be fair..you are not alone. :/

Gunner

"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except
in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism
proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is
merely the difference between murder and suicide."
- Ayn Rand, from "Foreign Policy Drains U.S. of Main
Weapons"

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:32:13 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it. g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust on his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

What blood spatters, brain matter, etc.? No blogs now. No quotes from
right-wing editorialists. Just tell us what you know yourself, and how
you
know it.

I asked you first.

I don't know of any. As far as I've seen, everyone credible who has examined
the case says it's a suicide.

So you're contradicting the official sources. Surely you have a reason for
doing so?

Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:32:13 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it. g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust on his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

What blood spatters, brain matter, etc.? No blogs now. No quotes from
right-wing editorialists. Just tell us what you know yourself, and how
you
know it.

I asked you first.

I don't know of any. As far as I've seen, everyone credible who has examined
the case says it's a suicide.

So you're contradicting the official sources. Surely you have a reason for
doing so?

Ed Huntress



Are they the same sources that said saddam had WMDs?


John

Are they the same sources that said saddam had WMDs?

ouch ;-)

"john" wrote in message
...


Ed Huntress wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:32:13 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy
tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it.
g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust on
his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

What blood spatters, brain matter, etc.? No blogs now. No quotes from
right-wing editorialists. Just tell us what you know yourself, and
how
you
know it.

I asked you first.

I don't know of any. As far as I've seen, everyone credible who has
examined
the case says it's a suicide.

So you're contradicting the official sources. Surely you have a reason
for
doing so?

Ed Huntress



Are they the same sources that said saddam had WMDs?

I don't think so. I haven't seen an opinion on WMDs from the D.C. police or
others who weighed in on it.

Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

"john" wrote in message
...


Ed Huntress wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:32:13 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy
tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love it.
g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust on
his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

What blood spatters, brain matter, etc.? No blogs now. No quotes from
right-wing editorialists. Just tell us what you know yourself, and
how
you
know it.

I asked you first.

I don't know of any. As far as I've seen, everyone credible who has
examined
the case says it's a suicide.

So you're contradicting the official sources. Surely you have a reason
for
doing so?

Ed Huntress



Are they the same sources that said saddam had WMDs?

I don't think so. I haven't seen an opinion on WMDs from the D.C. police or
others who weighed in on it.

Ed Huntress



Oh sorry about that... they are only small fish and haven't moved up to
the big time yet. still honest and innocent.


John

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
and from my perspective, yours reveals a serious disconnect with
reality, but to be fair..you are not alone. :/


No,
He isn't. You aren't starting to use your head for more than a hat rack are
you?
Look around. Test for truth.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
Portland
www.machiningsolution.com

"john" wrote in message
...


Ed Huntress wrote:

"john" wrote in message
...


Ed Huntress wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:32:13 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:03:43 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Ask Gunner where he gets his info about it. If you like fairy
tales,
attributed to unknown and unsubstantiated sources, you'll love
it.
g

Ed Huntress

So Ed, where was the blood spatters, the brain matter, the dust
on
his
shoes and the vanishing and reappearing pistol?

What blood spatters, brain matter, etc.? No blogs now. No quotes
from
right-wing editorialists. Just tell us what you know yourself,
and
how
you
know it.

I asked you first.

I don't know of any. As far as I've seen, everyone credible who has
examined
the case says it's a suicide.

So you're contradicting the official sources. Surely you have a
reason
for
doing so?

Ed Huntress



Are they the same sources that said saddam had WMDs?

I don't think so. I haven't seen an opinion on WMDs from the D.C. police
or
others who weighed in on it.

Ed Huntress



Oh sorry about that... they are only small fish and haven't moved up to
the big time yet. still honest and innocent.


John

Well, you never know, John. It could be that the D.C. police dept. is really
a front organization for the Trilateral Commission. John Rockefeller
actually is controlling them from the grave.

If you work at it, you probably could put the whole conspiratorial case
together. And then you could get a job at the Washington Times, with an
office funded by Richard Mellon Scaife and the Olin Foundation. Rev. Moon
might give you a military commission in the Soldiers for Christ.

There's big money in cooking up conspiracy theories these days. I've been
trying to convince Gunner that he should stop giving it all away for free.

Ed Huntress

So you're contradicting the official sources. Surely you have a
reason
for
doing so?

Ed Huntress



Are they the same sources that said saddam had WMDs?

I don't think so. I haven't seen an opinion on WMDs from the D.C. police
or
others who weighed in on it.

Ed Huntress



Oh sorry about that... they are only small fish and haven't moved up to
the big time yet. still honest and innocent.


John

Well, you never know, John. It could be that the D.C. police dept. is really
a front organization for the Trilateral Commission. John Rockefeller
actually is controlling them from the grave.

If you work at it, you probably could put the whole conspiratorial case
together. And then you could get a job at the Washington Times, with an
office funded by Richard Mellon Scaife and the Olin Foundation. Rev. Moon
might give you a military commission in the Soldiers for Christ.

There's big money in cooking up conspiracy theories these days. I've been
trying to convince Gunner that he should stop giving it all away for free.

Ed Huntress



And I thought the ghost of jimmy hoffa was behind it all. oh well this
is almost as bad as when i found out the easter bunny wasn't real.

John

"john" wrote in message
...


And I thought the ghost of jimmy hoffa was behind it all.


Who's to say ole jimmy aint still alive ???

--

SVL

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:01:16 -0700, "PrecisionMachinisT"
wrote:


"john" wrote in message
...


And I thought the ghost of jimmy hoffa was behind it all.


Who's to say ole jimmy aint still alive ???

--

SVL

Didn't you see the Moore documentary on Hoffa... in Bruce Almighty. a
trained K9 dog dug up Hoffa's body along with Id and dental records?

Case closed,

Mike

PrecisionMachinisT wrote:

"john" wrote in message
...


And I thought the ghost of jimmy hoffa was behind it all.


Who's to say ole jimmy aint still alive ???

--

SVL


Then it must be him then causing all this trouble..... probably did in
the wtc too. He wanted more union jobs.

"Mike In Santa Cruz" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:01:16 -0700, "PrecisionMachinisT"
wrote:


"john" wrote in message
...


And I thought the ghost of jimmy hoffa was behind it all.


Who's to say ole jimmy aint still alive ???



Didn't you see the Moore documentary on Hoffa... in Bruce Almighty. a
trained K9 dog dug up Hoffa's body along with Id and dental records?

Actually no, I didnt........

And who the **** is this Moore dood I keep hearing about anyways, some
Inspector Clouseau type or something ???

--

SVL

"john" wrote in message
...


Well, you never know, John. It could be that the D.C. police dept. is
really
a front organization for the Trilateral Commission. John Rockefeller
actually is controlling them from the grave.

If you work at it, you probably could put the whole conspiratorial case
together. And then you could get a job at the Washington Times, with an
office funded by Richard Mellon Scaife and the Olin Foundation. Rev.
Moon
might give you a military commission in the Soldiers for Christ.

There's big money in cooking up conspiracy theories these days. I've
been
trying to convince Gunner that he should stop giving it all away for
free.

Ed Huntress



And I thought the ghost of jimmy hoffa was behind it all. oh well this
is almost as bad as when i found out the easter bunny wasn't real.

Hoffa is overused. We Jerseyites dredge up his memory every once in a while
because he's been a local guy for the past few decades or so, but he's
really become a cliche.

Ed Huntress