Re: the constitutionality of declaring war
The lead editorial in The New Yorker is called The Talk of the Town and is usually
written by Hendrik Hertzberg who is, believe it or not, an intelligent liberal (they do
exist). Hes the kind of person with whom you might not always agree, but who mak
Here's an interesting site for those following the situation in Iraq: the UN's
Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, headed by Hans Blix.
http://www.unmovic.org/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
"The greater danger for most of us l
Dan R Allen wrote:
> > >Dan:
> > But you also see cites like this:
> > "On Monday, Perisic and two others were charged with espionage, the
> > state-run Tanjug news agency reported, citing a statement released by
> > military prosecutors. If convicted, the three face between three and 15
> > ye
> >Dan:
> But you also see cites like this:
> "On Monday, Perisic and two others were charged with espionage, the
> state-run Tanjug news agency reported, citing a statement released by
> military prosecutors. If convicted, the three face between three and 15
> years in jail." This came from t
Fair enough, and I agree totally. (Sorry -- I really tried to find a nit to pick,
but your scalp -- maybe even what it covers -- is absolutely healthy).
Stephen Beecroft wrote:.
>
> I didn't say that "most" Muslims want to blast Americans, if that's what
> you're suggesting (though that might be
-Marc-
> jihad has traditionally, in Sunni Islam, meant the kind of
> struggle that we all must undergo in order to purify ourselves
> in order to make ourselves fit to be in God's presence after
> death. The Taliban have given the term a bad name).
-Stephen-
> Not so. That is, the term "jihad" h
"Many" is not "most" any more than "many" crusades have not been "most" crusades.
Stephen Beecroft wrote:
> -Marc-
> > jihad has traditionally, in Sunni Islam, meant the kind of
> > struggle that we all must undergo in order to purify ourselves
> > in order to make ourselves fit to be in God's p
-Marc-
> jihad has traditionally, in Sunni Islam, meant the kind of
> struggle that we all must undergo in order to purify ourselves
> in order to make ourselves fit to be in God's presence after
> death. The Taliban have given the term a bad name).
Not so. That is, the term "jihad" has usually (
Dan R Allen wrote:
>
>
> Marc:
> But most of the money for terrorist activities comes from Saudi Arabia. Not
> from
> the government perhaps (although some does through Ikhwan and similar
> "fraternal"
> and "charitable" organizations, and through direct funding of the PLO's
> government bureau
Dan R Allen wrote:
> >Dan:
> But you also see cites like this:
> "On Monday, Perisic and two others were charged with espionage, the
> state-run Tanjug news agency reported, citing a statement released by
> military prosecutors. If convicted, the three face between three and 15
> years in jail.
> Dan:
> I knew that they didn't. John had implied that Saudi Arabia had a higher
> level of guilt for the attacks than did Iraq, because 15(17) of the
> terrorist were Saudi, with Saudi Passports. Just because they were Saudi
> citizens does not mean that the Saudi government supported their
> Dan:
> What level of sourcing is required? The article stated that one source
was
> Janes. No, they didn't give a _specific_ cite to a _specific_ article or
> employee, but then again, neither does most news services.
>
Marc:
Actually most do. For instance, a science article will say, "In a
Sounds like it was all just a big misunderstanding.
Dan R Allen wrote:
> Marc:
> Ah, exit visas are a whole 'nother matter, and you're right, some countries
> require them (East Germany used to, too). But I got the impression Dan was
> talking about *entry* visas and somehow was under the impre
Dan R Allen wrote:
> Marc:
> Precisely. You challenged John to show why the Saudi government sent them.
> I
> pointed out that they didn't. I'm happy that you've come around to our way
> of
> thinking ;-)
>
> Dan:
> I knew that they didn't. John had implied that Saudi Arabia had a higher
> leve
Dan R Allen wrote:
> > Dan:
> > Certainly conservative - therefore unreliable?
> >
>
> Marc:
> No, not necessarily, but they don't give their sources. And whether they're
> conservative or liberal, that makes them sloppy journalists. Also, hiding
> their
> background is, in my opinion, dishones
Marc:
Ah, exit visas are a whole 'nother matter, and you're right, some countries
require them (East Germany used to, too). But I got the impression Dan was
talking about *entry* visas and somehow was under the impression that the
Saudis
issued entry visas to the *US*, which is of course, back
Marc:
Actually my point is that Dan got it backwards. Saudi doesn't issue visas
to
allow its citizens to visit the US. The US issues that kind of visa, since
a visa
is permission to visit, and foreign countries don't have the authority to
do
that. Saudi Arabia can issue visas to allow foreigne
Marc:
Precisely. You challenged John to show why the Saudi government sent them.
I
pointed out that they didn't. I'm happy that you've come around to our way
of
thinking ;-)
Dan:
I knew that they didn't. John had implied that Saudi Arabia had a higher
level of guilt for the attacks than did Ir
> Dan:
> Certainly conservative - therefore unreliable?
>
Marc:
No, not necessarily, but they don't give their sources. And whether they're
conservative or liberal, that makes them sloppy journalists. Also, hiding
their
background is, in my opinion, dishonest. Everyone knows that CATO has a
h
At 04:50 PM 9/27/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
>> Can you support your statement that the Saudi's are granting visas
without
>> US approval? Anyone can print anything they want to, but that doesn't
mean
>> that we have to allow them entry.
How about, "I heard it on MSNBC news?"
I take it your questions are rhetorical, but I'll take the last one straight. Pakistan
was the U.S. partner during the Cold War, whereas India, it's much larger neighbour,
was considered pro-Moscow (which is a vast oversimplification, but let's assume that
for the sake of argument). I predict o
> The worst problem is actually in Pakistan, closely followed by Egypt. Pakistan is
> the 2nd largest recipient of foreign aid from the US (after Israel), and Egypt is
> 3rd. He that hath ears and can count
What is it that you are implying, Marc? Are you saying that the US supports those
Or, as one of the murderers said about killing children during the Haun's
Mill massacre, "Nits will make lice, and if he had lived he would have been
a Mormon."
--
Steven Montgomery
At 12:33 AM 9/29/2002, you wrote:
>Or as they used to say bluntly during the Lebanese civil war, nits grow up
>
At 10:02 AM 9/29/02 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] favored us with:
>If a country wants to require exit visas for its citizens, I think
>that is the country's perogative.
And it also an individual's prerogative to not travel to that country. I have always
had a barely conscious fear of not being ab
Marc Schindler:
Ah, exit visas ...
But I got the impression Dan was talking about *entry* visas
and somehow was under the impression that the Saudis
issued entry visas to the *US*, which is of course, backwards.
___
Correct. I was just adding a little color and flavor to the
dis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Marc Schindler:
>
> ... Saudi Arabia can issue visas to allow foreigners to visit
> *their* country (although good luck if you're a woman or a
> tourist -- hajj and business visas are pretty well all that
> Saudi Arabia issues).
>
> ___
>
> Saudi visas are
Or as they used to say bluntly during the Lebanese civil war, nits grow up to be
lice.
Grampa Bill wrote:
> "Elmer L. Fairbank" wrote:
>
> > There is an Arab proverb that goes something like: The friend of my friend
> > is my friend, the friend of my enemy is my enemy.
>
> -
At 05:23 PM 9/28/02 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] favored us with:
>Being in country under those circumstances causes a very
>interesting feeling to one, such as I, who is accustomed to
>the freedoms of the US of A.
It is one of the reasons I refuse to leave the USA. --JWR
/
Marc Schindler:
... Saudi Arabia can issue visas to allow foreigners to visit
*their* country (although good luck if you're a woman or a
tourist -- hajj and business visas are pretty well all that
Saudi Arabia issues).
___
Saudi visas are an invitation to enter the Kingdom as a
"Elmer L. Fairbank" wrote:
> There is an Arab proverb that goes something like: The friend of my friend
> is my friend, the friend of my enemy is my enemy.
Grampa Bill comments:
And I've heard the converse, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
But I like th
At 02:18 PM 9/28/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
>The worst problem is actually in Pakistan, closely followed by Egypt. Pakistan is
>the 2nd largest recipient of foreign aid from the US (after Israel), and Egypt is
>3rd. He that hath ears and can count
In modern times it has been
I have no idea what you're talking about.
To repeat, for the third time, Saudi Arabia, nor any other non-US country, has
the right to issue a visa to allow a non-US citizen to visit the US. Only the US
INS can do that. Saudi Arabia, likewise, is the only jurisdiction that has the
authority to per
Actually my point is that Dan got it backwards. Saudi doesn't issue visas to
allow its citizens to visit the US. The US issues that kind of visa, since a visa
is permission to visit, and foreign countries don't have the authority to do
that. Saudi Arabia can issue visas to allow foreigners to visi
Dan R Allen wrote:
> > Dan:
> > Where is the evidence that those 15 were sent by the Saudi government?
>
> Marc:
> Their passports. John didn't say they were sent by the Saudi government, he
> merely pointed out that they were Saudis, which is true.
>
> Dan:
> I wasn't denying that they were Sa
Dan R Allen wrote:
> Marc:
> What the U.S. government has has to come from its intelligence agencies.
> Unless
> you have a suggested alternative source?
>
> Dan:
> What I'm suggesting is that they are not releasing every bit of information
> to the press.
Uh, yeah, I'd go along with that. Hec
Dan R Allen wrote:
> Dan:
> This would suggest then that we really can't rely on what we hear in the
> news to judge whether the war is right or wrong. Wouldn't you agree?
>
Ever since WWII, the US govt has allowed the media less and less access to the
war front. Does this tell you something?
Dan R Allen wrote:
> At 03:48 PM 9/26/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
> >Dan:
> >I would have a problem with the global wording also, except that he also
> >said that this would be a _long_ war;
>
> John:
> In other words a war we have no intention of winning. Sounds like pretty
> tricky
You know, we haven't found Jimmy Hoffa's body either. Actually, I have it
on good authority that OBL is now rooming with Elvis and Jimmy Hoffa.
Jon
John W. Redelfs wrote:
> At 04:50 PM 9/27/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
> >On the WTC. But he orchestrated the first WTC bombing and
This was an ongoing topic on Fox News. The US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia
and some state department geeks tried to justify it.
It is true. If only it were legal to have satellite dishes in Canada (how
in the world did THAT get to be the case?? That's weird!) you could get
decent news.
Jon
Joh
At 04:50 PM 9/27/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
>> Can you support your statement that the Saudi's are granting visas without
>> US approval? Anyone can print anything they want to, but that doesn't mean
>> that we have to allow them entry.
How about, "I heard it on MSNBC news?"
///
At 04:50 PM 9/27/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
>On the WTC. But he orchestrated the first WTC bombing and the bombing of the USS
>Cole, plus the bombing of a disco in Berlin, from his base in Sudan, where he
>likely is now (if not in Kashmir).
That's another thing that cracks me up
Marc:
What the U.S. government has has to come from its intelligence agencies.
Unless
you have a suggested alternative source?
Dan:
What I'm suggesting is that they are not releasing every bit of information
to the press.
Marc:
> I see they haven't given a specific citation to Jane's. Also, C
> Dan:
> Where is the evidence that those 15 were sent by the Saudi government?
Marc:
Their passports. John didn't say they were sent by the Saudi government, he
merely pointed out that they were Saudis, which is true.
Dan:
I wasn't denying that they were Saudi's; only that they were not ope
Dan R Allen wrote:
> Marc:
> In any case, do you seriously think this piece of intelligence is
> sufficient for
> George III to build invasion plans on, even if it were true? After all, do
> you
> have any idea how many intelligence services the *U.S.* has? Just a rough
> guess
>
> Dan:
> I
Dan R Allen wrote:
> John:
> As for you claim that the Saudi's "show a willingness to work with us to at
> least reduce the terrorism," I would like to see you support that
> statement. 15 of the 19 who made the suicide attacks were Saudis. Osama
> bin Laden is Saudi. Supposedly the attacks
Good points and analysis.
Let's move to more nuclear and solar and fuel cell energy and let the Saudis
sink into their own cesspool. of course, we may have another Iraq to deal
with, but, then, that will give us something to argue about.
Jon
Gary Smith wrote:
> Let's see: 17 of 19 hijackers i
Those who don't want to do something in Iraq for whatever reasons diminish
any evidence. Those who want to do something enhance any evidence.
>From my perspective, the evidence is sufficient. Many people are convicted
of crimes in our criminal system based upon circumstantial evidence. As an
e
At 06:47 AM 9/27/02 -0400 Elmer L. Fairbank favored us with:
>There is an Arab proverb that goes something like: The friend of my
friend is my friend, the friend of my enemy is my enemy. An important
point to remember in the coming years.
This may be an Arab proverb, but it is also just
Dan:
This would suggest then that we really can't rely on what we hear in the
news to judge whether the war is right or wrong. Wouldn't you agree?
Dan Allen:
If this is _all_ that they have no, but do you _really_ believe
that this it all of it? Most likely what we get is just the stuff
tha
At 03:48 PM 9/26/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
>Dan:
>I would have a problem with the global wording also, except that he also
>said that this would be a _long_ war;
John:
In other words a war we have no intention of winning. Sounds like pretty
tricky language to me.
Dan:
No, the in
At 06:47 AM 9/27/02 -0400 Elmer L. Fairbank favored us with:
>There is an Arab proverb that goes something like: The friend of my friend is my
>friend, the friend of my enemy is my enemy. An important point to remember in
>the coming years.
This may be an Arab proverb, but it is also just
At 14:13 9/26/2002 -0800, BLT wrote:
>If this true, then Arabs rightly think that the USA is standing between
>them and victory over Israel. That would make every anti-Israeli Arab an
>anti-American. I don't think we can make a meaningful distinction between
>anti-American terrorists and an
Dan Allen:
If this is _all_ that they have no, but do you _really_ believe
that this it all of it? Most likely what we get is just the stuff
that they control the least.
___
It would be important to note that at the very beginning of
this exercise in terrorism, it was announced
At 03:48 PM 9/26/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
>Dan:
>I would have a problem with the global wording also, except that he also
>said that this would be a _long_ war;
In other words a war we have no intention of winning. Sounds like pretty tricky
language to me.
>with the immediate foc
John:
I think that every Arab nation would drive Israel into the sea if they
could, and it is the aid of US Jews and other Americans that continue to
make that impossible. Were any nation to set up an effective blockade
preventing Israel from doing any trade with other nations, it would becom
At 02:32 PM 9/26/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
>Enough that I think it should have a lower priority for us to deal with.
>Mostly I think that the terrorists use that claim as a propaganda tool
>without fully believing it. I believe that their hatred of Israel is much
>deeper, and that we a
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
09/26/02 01:42 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] War on Iraq
P
At 01:11 PM 9/26/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
>I'm aware that there is Saudi support for much of the Palestinian
>terrorism, but do you have any evidence that they have been supporting
>anti-American terrorism?
Do you believe that there is any great different between Palestinian terrori
Marc:
In any case, do you seriously think this piece of intelligence is
sufficient for
George III to build invasion plans on, even if it were true? After all, do
you
have any idea how many intelligence services the *U.S.* has? Just a rough
guess
Dan:
If this is _all_ that they have no, but
At 05:13 PM 9/25/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
>Dan:
>Saddam MAY NOT have ordered the attacks, but it is very LIKELY
that he was
>involved in the planning, or financial and intel support.
> http://www.cnsnews.com/Pentagon/Archive/200109/PEN20010925a.html
>"the CIA is LOOKING INT
Aman is one of Israel's 5 intelligence agencies (military intelligence, or in
Hebrew, Agaf ha-Modi'in). It is also the name of a news agency in the Middle
East. Israel's best-known intelligence service is known as Mossad. There's also
Shin Bet, Lekem and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' Centre for
John said:
>I don't know what is going on. None of my information sources are
reliable. I don't >know of any reliable information sources. But I
smell a rat. Something is rotten in >Copenhagen.
Taken out of context, it sounds like you are one poor lost soul. ;-)
Here, have some chocolate
At 05:13 PM 9/25/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
>Dan:
>Saddam MAY NOT have ordered the attacks, but it is very LIKELY that he was
>involved in the planning, or financial and intel support.
> http://www.cnsnews.com/Pentagon/Archive/200109/PEN20010925a.html
>"the CIA is LOOKING INTO
Especially because the "Islamic World" includes France, Germany, Britain, Canada...and
the United States now.
John's more than right: there is no place to hide.
"John W. Redelfs" wrote:
> Gary Smith favored us with:
> >> Hussein may not be directly involved in the past attacks, but is part of
>
Dan:
Saddam may not have ordered the attacks, but it is very likely that he was
involved in the planning, or financial and intel support.
http://www.cnsnews.com/Pentagon/Archive/200109/PEN20010925a.html
"the CIA is looking into whether one of the suicide pilots in the Sept. 11
attacks - Moha
Gary Smith favored us with:
>> Hussein may not be directly involved in the past attacks, but is part of
>> a growing regional problem. Given what we know of history, if a new Nazi
>> party arose in Germany, and Jews started disappearing into concentration
>> camps; would you suggest we wait until
Japan attacked you first, so your agonizing over Hiroshima doesn't even enter
into the picture. There are no "right" people to bomb in Iraq.
Gary Smith wrote:
> I hope we bomb the right people, also. However, it isn't always easy to
> draw the line in the right place. Was the bombing of Hiroshim
67 matches
Mail list logo
