because the government has set the precedent, I regularly remove food
from the company refrigerator and don't tell anyone that I'm doing it.
I've also figured out that the hallway outside our office belongs to the
building, so once I'm in the hallway, I can do anything I want to with
the food without answering to any of my co-workers. I like to stand
outside office doors to listen to what people have brought in their
lunch so that I can launch preemptive strikes upon the refrigerator. I
won't go into detail about what happened to a pudding cup that was
taunting my hunger yesterday. Let's just say that he lost his lid....
--
Marlon Moyer, Sr. Internet Developer
American Contractors Insurance Group
phone: 972.687.9445
fax: 972.687.0607
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.acig.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 8:44 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Question
>
> My take is that O'Reilly is an idiot. A "War on Terrorism" is rhetoric
> without any basis in law.
>
> -Kevin
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Stanley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 8:04 AM
> Subject: Question
>
>
> > Was watching O-Reilly last night on Fox, and he said something to
the
> effect
> > that if the US had officially declared war on Terrorism (I dont know
how
> you
> > do that), but if they did, then people picked up that are actively
> fighting
> > us, but are not wearing official uniforms are not subject to the
rules
> of
> > the Geneva Convention.
> >
> > What's youre take on the situation?
> >
> > Seems to me that an arguable case could be made that in a
country-less
> army
> > like Al Queda that whatever clothes they are wearing, that those are
> their
> > uniforms. And that the classic definition of sabateur may not apply.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
