Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010
From: charliew2 (charliew2_at_ev1.net)
Date: 09/26/04
- Next message: charliew2: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- In reply to: John Larkin: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Next in thread: John Larkin: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Reply: John Larkin: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Reply: Fred B. McGalliard: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 10:16:21 -0500
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:6gmbl0t1dceqe5eherb3omej0bgpdm80qr@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 13:02:12 -0500, "charliew2" <charliew2@ev1.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Don Lancaster wrote:
> >> Tkalbfus1 wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Bill Ward wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Let me clarify my definition of a "terrorist" as simply
> >>>>> anyone who _targets_ innocent non-combatants with deliberate
> >>>>> civilian bombings, hostage taking, on-camera beheadings,
> >>>>> etc., rather than attacking the armed forces of the enemy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bill Ward
> >>>>
> >>>> Such as George W Bush?
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Many thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Don Lancaster
> >>>
> >>> Let me break this down for you so that its easy for you to
> >>> understand.
> >>>
> >>> Does George W. Bush target innocent non-combatants with deliberate
> >>> civilian bombings?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >>
> >> Next question?
> >>
> >>> Meaning does he order bombing strikes merely to kill innocent
> >>> civilians and if he does then declare the mission successful?
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >> Next question?
> >>
> >>
> >>> Does George W. Bush take hostages?
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >> Stashes them at Guantanamo.
> >
> >(cut)
> >
> >This is an excellent point, Don. "Enemy combatants" who are denied due
> >process rights do indeed start looking like hostages after a few years.
> >
>
> They're not hostages unless the captors offer to release them in
> exchange for something. A prisoner is there for what he did; a hostage
> is there for what somebody else did.
>
> John
>
>
Normally, I agree. However, if the prisoners are denied due process, and
they are locked up for extended periods of time without charges, how do you
know what they did if the government doesn't go through the steps of proving
beyond a reasonable doubt that they did, in fact, do something?
This *isn't* a liberal plea for a group of people who everyone in the U.S.
hates. It's a reminder that it's a VERY short trip from denying due process
to foreign "terrorists", to denying due process to U.S. citizens accused of
terrorism. If our fight against terrorism leads the U.S. to abandon most of
the Bill of Rights' protections, the terrorists have largely won the battle.
- Next message: charliew2: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- In reply to: John Larkin: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Next in thread: John Larkin: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Reply: John Larkin: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Reply: Fred B. McGalliard: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|