In a message dated 11/29/06 6:22:43 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about > the first amendment, but I think that the national security threat of > losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several > million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to > proactively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement. > > And, I further think that we should propose a Genève convention for > fighting terrorism which makes very clear that those who would fight > outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass > destruction, and those who would target civilians are in fact subject > to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect > civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength > that it is truly horrendous. > > This is a sober topic, but I think it is a topic we need a national > dialogue about, and we need to get ahead of the curve rather than > wait until actually we literary lose a city which could literally > happen within the next decade if we are unfortunate. > > http://www.newt.org/backpage.asp?art=3819 Sounds like he's watched too many episodes of "24." :) No, Newt is ahead of the curve. Think about it now so you can prevent these things from happening or think about what we should have done after it happens. Didn't the Blue Meanies take control of Pepperland because non of the Bliss Ninnies believed they were coming? And there ain't no more Beatles to sing All You Need Is Love.
