RE: July the 4th - VMS

This is a discussion on RE: July the 4th - VMS ; I don't suppose you would mind posting your national, ethnic, and religious affiliation would you? It is beginning to sound like you are a bit of shill for those bigoted religious zealots over there. If you have a reason to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: RE: July the 4th

  1. RE: July the 4th

    I don't suppose you would mind posting your national, ethnic, and religious
    affiliation would you?
    It is beginning to sound like you are a bit of shill for those bigoted
    religious zealots over there.
    If you have a reason to be, it would be nice to know it, just to avoid
    saying anything terribly insulting to you.

    See, that is the way the U.S. works, we try to be respectful of other
    people's beliefs, but we absolutely insist on the right to have our
    individual beliefs respected too. And we back that right up with force of
    arms.

    This is something the people in that region of the world have *never* had,
    and it appears they are not able to accept or deal with, except in baby
    doses. Jacobin beliefs not withstanding.


    -Paul

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca]
    > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 9:41 PM
    > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
    > Subject: Re: July the 4th
    >
    > Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    > > Excuse me? 10 foot chainlink fence. Signs in multiple languages

    > that
    > > say "land mines on other side of fence". Hardly seems terrorist to

    > me.
    > > Seems like perfectly adequate warning.

    >
    >
    > In case you had not heard, there is a worldwide ban on use of
    > landmines,
    > and the USA refused to sign it. Why does the USA insist on continued
    > use of landmines ?



  2. Re: July the 4th

    On 07/26/07 23:12, Paul Raulerson wrote:
    > I don't suppose you would mind posting your national, ethnic, and religious
    > affiliation would you?


    He's Canadian, eh. (The .ca should give it away, eh.) Lives in
    Quebec, eh.

    Probably likes beating people with long, crooked sticks, eh.

    > It is beginning to sound like you are a bit of shill for those bigoted
    > religious zealots over there.
    > If you have a reason to be, it would be nice to know it, just to avoid
    > saying anything terribly insulting to you.


    It's his rabid anti-Americanism.

    > See, that is the way the U.S. works, we try to be respectful of other
    > people's beliefs,


    And fail miserably. When even try, which isn't very often.

    > but we absolutely insist on the right to have our
    > individual beliefs respected too. And we back that right up with force of
    > arms.
    >
    > This is something the people in that region of the world have *never* had,
    > and it appears they are not able to accept or deal with, except in baby
    > doses. Jacobin beliefs not withstanding.
    >
    >
    > -Paul
    >
    >> -----Original Message-----
    >> From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca]
    >> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 9:41 PM
    >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
    >> Subject: Re: July the 4th
    >>
    >> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    >>> Excuse me? 10 foot chainlink fence. Signs in multiple languages

    >> that
    >>> say "land mines on other side of fence". Hardly seems terrorist to

    >> me.
    >>> Seems like perfectly adequate warning.

    >>
    >> In case you had not heard, there is a worldwide ban on use of
    >> landmines,
    >> and the USA refused to sign it. Why does the USA insist on continued
    >> use of landmines ?

    >



    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  3. Re: July the 4th

    Paul Raulerson wrote:
    > See, that is the way the U.S. works, we try to be respectful of other
    > people's beliefs, but we absolutely insist on the right to have our
    > individual beliefs respected too. And we back that right up with force of
    > arms.


    You can't tell others they can't have while the USA insists that it
    can have

    = nuclear, WMD's land mines, pollution etc etc etc.

    The USA is *a* country of the planet. Not "THE" country of the planet.
    It deserves no speacial consideration and if it wants to be respected,
    it must adhere to what the world has decided via the UN.


    Someone else complained about my attitude towards your country. Does it
    not bother you that so many people in the world have come to hate what
    the USA has become ? Do you really believe your lying idiot politicians
    who claim that people hate the uSA simply because the USA has freedom ?

    The reason the USA is so despised, the reason you have groups such as
    Al-Quada hell bent on hurting the USA is because the USA insists on
    disregarding what the planet wants and impose its own will on the world.

    And the USA has now shows it is a very dangerous baby. UN didn't want to
    give Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz/Cheney's gift by refusing a resolution to allow
    them to send their army to Iraq, so they throw a tamper tantrum and go
    into Iraq anyways and enjoy the fireworks they created.

    History has proven that when an invador deploys land mines, it never
    removes them when it leaves because it always ends up leaving in shame
    and fairly quickly. There are very good reasons why the rest of the
    world has banned the use of land mines. The USA has no business laying
    land mines outside its own territory. If it wants to have the burden of
    all the extra medical costs of taking care of americans maimed by land
    mines inside the USA, that it isn't business. But it has no business
    laying land mines outside its territory, forcing that country to then be
    burndened for *decades* by the high costs of taking care of the victims
    of the USA's short term use of landmines.

    Do you realise that people are still getting maimed in Vietnam ?

  4. Re: July the 4th

    On Jul 27, 1:13 pm, JF Mezei wrote:
    > Paul Raulerson wrote:
    > > See, that is the way the U.S. works, we try to be respectful of other
    > > people's beliefs, but we absolutely insist on the right to have our
    > > individual beliefs respected too. And we back that right up with force of
    > > arms.

    >
    > You can't tell others they can't have while the USA insists that it
    > can have
    >
    > = nuclear, WMD's land mines, pollution etc etc etc.


    You would prefer that MORE countries get atomic weapons?

    You would prefer that some other country had gotten atomic weapons
    first?

    Thank your lucky stars it was the United States that got them first.

    The problem with principles is that they sometimes have unintended
    consequences.

    As a superpower, the USA is pretty restrained compared to what it
    could do and to what many other countries would have done if they were
    a leading superpower or had gotten atomic weapons first.

    I don't recall the US forbidding anyone from using land mines, but I
    could just be unaware of it.

    No one wants pollution!!! What's your point there?

    > The USA is *a* country of the planet. Not "THE" country of the planet.
    > It deserves no speacial consideration and if it wants to be respected,
    > it must adhere to what the world has decided via the UN.
    >
    > Someone else complained about my attitude towards your country. Does it
    > not bother you that so many people in the world have come to hate what
    > the USA has become ? Do you really believe your lying idiot politicians
    > who claim that people hate the uSA simply because the USA has freedom ?


    Hmmm. Lots of people hate the French. Many hate the Jews. Others hate
    blacks. Still others hate Muslims. A lot of people hate terrorists.
    And you hate America and/or Americans.

    One reason some hate the USA is that it is so successful. This is a
    basic principle of human nature summed up by the saying, "No one ever
    kicks a dead dog". Yes, some hate the USA because of what the Bush
    administration has done. But going by who hates whom isn't a very good
    argument for your point. People are entitled to their own opinions,
    but not their own facts.

    The USA also does a lot of good in the world, though it could and
    should do better.

    > The reason the USA is so despised, the reason you have groups such as
    > Al-Quada hell bent on hurting the USA is because the USA insists on
    > disregarding what the planet wants and impose its own will on the world.


    Hmmmm. This sounds a lot more like Al Qaida than the USA. I believe
    Osama was pissed off that their were US troops in Saudi Arabia. I
    really don't think bin Laden gives a rat's ass about what "the planet"
    wants. He wants to rule an Islamic empire and kill all the "infidels".
    He wants to oust the Saudi gov't. He wants to kill all Americans and
    Jews. This is what "the planet" wants? Maybe it's what YOU want!

    Just what exactly does "the planet" want and why do you call it "the
    planet"?

    > And the USA has now shows it is a very dangerous baby. UN didn't want to
    > give Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz/Cheney's gift by refusing a resolution to allow
    > them to send their army to Iraq, so they throw a tamper tantrum and go
    > into Iraq anyways and enjoy the fireworks they created.


    Yep. I'll let you in on a secret: Canada is next!!! So you better arm
    yourselves now!!!



  5. Re: July the 4th

    AEF wrote:
    >>
    >> = nuclear, WMD's land mines, pollution etc etc etc.

    >
    > You would prefer that MORE countries get atomic weapons?


    Until the USA gets rid of its own WMDs, it has no right to ask others to
    get rid of theirs.

    And as long as the USA supports Israel's possession of nuclear weapons
    without requiring it to sign any treaties, then the USA is in no
    position to ask other middle eastern countries to not have a nuclear
    programme. If you want respect, you need to be fair. If you want to be
    arbirtrator, you need to be neutral.

    And in terms of the land mines: If the USA is unwilling to deploy them
    on its own territory (for instance, to defend its border with mexico),
    then it has no business deploying them outside its territory.


    > One reason some hate the USA is that it is so successful.


    This is utter bull**** brainwashing from your government. And until
    americans cease to swallow this, they cannot possibly understand world
    affairs and as such, should not give any of their government the right
    to interfere in world affairs.

    > The USA also does a lot of good in the world, though it could and
    > should do better.


    The bad that its does far outweights the good that it does because it
    totally discredits the USA. The USA can no longer work to imporve human
    rights since it has become itself an human rights abuser, user of
    torture, kidnapping, secret prisons etc. It can no longer demand its
    citizens be given due legal process in other countries because it now
    gives itself the choice to refuse to grant due legal process to non-USA
    citizens inside the USA (against the USA constitution, and against the
    UN charter of rights which was ratified into law by the USA when the UN
    was formed).

    What this debate has told me is that there are still many americans who
    have not yet woken up from the Bush brainwashing and it will still take
    a few years before they do and start to see it the way the rest of the
    world sees the atrocities performed by the USA.

  6. Re: July the 4th

    On Jul 28, 5:31 pm, JF Mezei wrote:
    > AEF wrote:
    >
    > >> = nuclear, WMD's land mines, pollution etc etc etc.

    >
    > > You would prefer that MORE countries get atomic weapons?

    >
    > Until the USA gets rid of its own WMDs, it has no right to ask others to
    > get rid of theirs.


    That would be stupid. Einstein, a pacifist at heart, who spent a good
    portion of his life trying to stop nations from going to war (after
    WWII), realized that unilateral disarmament would be very foolish. You
    speak of rights. I speak of avoiding nuclear wars. If you think
    "rights" in this case are more important, that's your opinion. Then
    don't complain about nuclear wars that would result from your
    foolishness. And then you would, of course, blame it on the US for
    following your own advice, but you'd omit the "your own advice" part.

    > And as long as the USA supports Israel's possession of nuclear weapons
    > without requiring it to sign any treaties, then the USA is in no
    > position to ask other middle eastern countries to not have a nuclear
    > programme. If you want respect, you need to be fair. If you want to be
    > arbirtrator, you need to be neutral.


    How does the US support Israel's possession of nuclear weapons? I
    don't believe either the US or Israel even admits that Israel has
    nuclear weapons. I'm not saying they don't have them, but I don't see
    any support for it. Nor do I see any danger FROM Israel possessing
    nuclear weapons. I DO see a big danger from the rest of the Middle
    Ease having nuclear weapons. Again you elevate "rights" above avoiding
    the horrible, widespread death and destruction that would result from
    other countries in the Middle Ease possessing nuclear weapons.

    Like I said, and you ignored, principles have consequences.

    > And in terms of the land mines: If the USA is unwilling to deploy them
    > on its own territory (for instance, to defend its border with mexico),
    > then it has no business deploying them outside its territory.


    This is a ridiculous statement. If the US deployed land mines on the
    Mexican border you'd be the first to scream bloody murder about it.
    Maybe there's no reason to deploy them on its own territory? We're not
    at war with Mexico.

    > > One reason some hate the USA is that it is so successful.

    >
    > This is utter bull**** brainwashing from your government. And until
    > americans cease to swallow this, they cannot possibly understand world
    > affairs and as such, should not give any of their government the right
    > to interfere in world affairs.


    You conveniently omitted the rest of my argument. I said ONE reason --
    not the ONLY reason. Please go back and reread my post for the rest of
    the argument, as it hasn't registered in your consciousness yet, and
    therefore, your comment here means nothing.

    > > The USA also does a lot of good in the world, though it could and
    > > should do better.

    >
    > The bad that its does far outweights the good that it does because it
    > totally discredits the USA. The USA can no longer work to imporve human
    > rights since it has become itself an human rights abuser, user of
    > torture, kidnapping, secret prisons etc. It can no longer demand its
    > citizens be given due legal process in other countries because it now
    > gives itself the choice to refuse to grant due legal process to non-USA
    > citizens inside the USA (against the USA constitution, and against the
    > UN charter of rights which was ratified into law by the USA when the UN
    > was formed).


    I think the world benefits merely from the existence of the USA. Yes,
    there are a lot of things wrong that need to be fixed. I think there'd
    be more wars without the US around.

    I admit, however, that the Iraq war was a big mistake in many, many
    ways.

    I don't think any people within the US are denied legal process unless
    you consider Gitmo part of the US.

    > What this debate has told me is that there are still many americans who
    > have not yet woken up from the Bush brainwashing and it will still take
    > a few years before they do and start to see it the way the rest of the
    > world sees the atrocities performed by the USA.


    Hey, the Iraqis are doing most of the killing in Iraq. And what about
    Darfur, Rwanda, East Timor, what about those atrocities which are far
    worse?

    JF, you're obviously from the blame America first crowd and probably
    even worse the blame ONLY America crowd. You are an anti-American
    bigot. You spoke absolute nonsense about living under Saddam. Why
    should we listen to you about anything else?

    AEF


  7. Re: July the 4th

    AEF wrote:

    > I don't think any people within the US are denied legal process unless
    > you consider Gitmo part of the US.


    The USA ambassador to Canada stated categorically that non-citizens had
    no legal rights in the USA. (trying to explain why the USA had kidnapped
    a canadian at JFK airport and sent him to be tortured in Syria).

    Human rights charters and constitutional garantees are there to ensure
    there are NO EXCEPTIONS and that EVERYONE benefits from those
    protections. If you start to allow exceptions, (such as not giving
    "blacks" full legal rights, discriminating between sex etc), you break
    your obligation to uphold those garantees.


    > bigot. You spoke absolute nonsense about living under Saddam. Why
    > should we listen to you about anything else?


    Lets continue this conversation in a few years when you will have
    awakened to real information about what the USA has been doing for the
    past 6 years. The USA is still living in its own litle universe without
    a clue of what is really happening even inside their own country thanks
    to the USA media who consciously decided to NOT report the atrocities
    performed by Bush&co. (and lack of a real democratic opposition to the
    party in power).


  8. Re: July the 4th

    On Jul 28, 8:12 pm, JF Mezei wrote:
    > AEF wrote:
    > > I don't think any people within the US are denied legal process unless
    > > you consider Gitmo part of the US.

    >
    > The USA ambassador to Canada stated categorically that non-citizens had
    > no legal rights in the USA. (trying to explain why the USA had kidnapped
    > a canadian at JFK airport and sent him to be tortured in Syria).


    All right. Things aren't perfect. We're going through a bad period.
    Like the McCarthy era.

    Anyway, I find it rather interesting that, and I quote from the NY
    Times, 2007-01-27:

    OTTAWA, Jan 26 -- Maher Arar, the Canadian software engineer who was
    detained by American officials in 2002 and deported to Syria where he
    was jailed and regularly tortured, will receive 11.5 million Canadian
    dollars ($9.75 million) in compensation from the Canadian government
    Friday.

    The compensation ends a lawsuit brought by Mr. Arar and follows a
    recommendation from a judicial inquiry into his case. That inquiry
    said the expulsion to Syria was caused by FALSE ASSERTIONS MADE BY THE
    CANADIAN POLICE TO UNITED STATES OFFICIALS, SAYING THAT MR. ARAR WAS
    AN ISLAMIC EXTREMIST LINKED TO AL QAEDA. [my emphasis].

    So *your* gov't is also to blame!!! But at least it admitted guilt in
    the end.

    [I'm still confused by this. Why would Syria torture someone for us?]

    Still, the USA's record for things like this is far better than
    Saddam's or any number of dictatorships around the world.

    > Human rights charters and constitutional garantees are there to ensure
    > there are NO EXCEPTIONS and that EVERYONE benefits from those
    > protections. If you start to allow exceptions, (such as not giving
    > "blacks" full legal rights, discriminating between sex etc), you break
    > your obligation to uphold those garantees.


    Well, explain that to your own gov't who started the whole mess with
    Mr. Arar!!!

    You can't expect perfection. Still, the US has a far better record
    than most countries!

    Talk about human rights, what about the Muslim/Arab world where woman
    are treated horribly? I've read about people's hands being cut off for
    burglary (and even saw one of Saddam's henchman doing exactly that on
    TV). I've also read that people are boiled in oil, but I'm not sure if
    that's really true.

    I am puzzled why you support a people who treat women as men's
    property. There are thousands of "honor killings" of women in Muslim
    societies. This doesn't happen in the US.

    In Arab and other Muslim countries, there is no freedom or civil
    rights. Criminals have their hands cut off. Free speech is brutally
    punished with really awful torture. Women are horribly abused. For
    religious worship only Islam is allowed.

    Here's a direct quote from an op-ed written by Nicholas Kristoff of
    the NY Times:

    [begin quote]
    Mrs. Noor, a pretty woman with soft eyes and a gold nose ring, grew up
    in the Pakistani countryside, and like her three sisters she never
    received a day's education. At the age of 15 she was married off by
    her parents, becoming the second wife of the imam of a local mosque.
    He beat her relentlessly.

    ''He would grab my hair, throw me on the floor and beat me with
    sticks,'' she recalled. Finally she ran away.

    Her husband found her, tied her to the bed, wired a metal rod to a 220-
    volt electrical outlet and forced it into her vagina. Surgeons managed
    to save her life, but horrific internal burns forced them to remove
    her bladder, urethra, vagina and rectum. Her doctor says she will have
    to carry external colostomy and urine bags for the rest of her life.

    At least she survived. Each year about one million girls in the third
    world die because of mistreatment and discrimination.

    In societies where males and females have relatively equal access to
    food and health care, and where there is no sex-selective abortion,
    females live longer and there are about 104 females for every 100
    males. In contrast, Pakistan has only 94 females for every 100 males,
    pointing to three million to seven million missing females in that
    country alone. Perhaps 10 percent of Pakistani girls and women die
    because of gender discrimination.

    In most cases it is not that parents deliberately kill their
    daughters. Rather, people skimp on spending on females -- just like
    Sedanshah, a man at an Afghan refugee camp I visited near here. When
    his wife and son were both sick, he bought medicine for the boy alone,
    saying of his wife, ''She's always sick, so it's not worth buying
    medicine for her.''

    At Capital Hospital here in Islamabad, a nurse named Rukhsana Kausar
    recalled fraternal-twin babies she had treated recently. At birth, the
    girl twin weighed one pound one ounce more than the boy. At seven
    months, their position was reversed: the boy weighed one pound 13
    ounces more than his sister.

    [end quote]

    Note that this type of behavior is normal in that world. It is
    inexcusable and not tolerated in the West.

    > > bigot. You spoke absolute nonsense about living under Saddam. Why
    > > should we listen to you about anything else?

    >
    > Lets continue this conversation in a few years when you will have
    > awakened to real information about what the USA has been doing for the
    > past 6 years. The USA is still living in its own litle universe without
    > a clue of what is really happening even inside their own country thanks
    > to the USA media who consciously decided to NOT report the atrocities
    > performed by Bush&co. (and lack of a real democratic opposition to the
    > party in power).


    So you'd rather live under Saddam than Bush. Enough said.

    And just what are these "unreported atrocities"???

    You're an anti-American bigot. Pure and simple. We're not perfect, but
    we're far better than most countries. Especially Saddam's Iraq!!!

    Come back in a few years when you learn how much worse many other
    countries are when compared to the US.

    AEF


  9. Re: July the 4th

    AEF wrote:
    > The compensation ends a lawsuit brought by Mr. Arar and follows a
    > recommendation from a judicial inquiry into his case. That inquiry
    > said the expulsion to Syria was caused by FALSE ASSERTIONS MADE BY THE
    > CANADIAN POLICE TO UNITED STATES OFFICIALS, SAYING THAT MR. ARAR WAS
    > AN ISLAMIC EXTREMIST LINKED TO AL QAEDA. [my emphasis].
    >
    > So *your* gov't is also to blame!!! But at least it admitted guilt in
    > the end.



    You need to take a look at the big picture. Intelligence agencies and
    police USED to exchange a lot of information with the americans, and
    information was "qualified". In the case of Arar, he had once met
    someone who was being watched. The person being watched wasn't a
    declared terrorist, he was just suspected of having ties. So this was
    entered in the CSIS database as such and sent the the yanks as part of
    regular bulk exchanges.

    The problem is that the yanks stopped reading the reports to qualify
    each entry and just treated all entries as "known terrorist".

    The failure of the canadian government was to continue to send such bulk
    reports at a time they should have known that the yank were misusing
    that information and no longer considering privacy issues.

    A LOT of non-americans were given the "terrorist treatment" when they
    casually ventured into the USA for business, transit, vacation, or
    visiting family. And it has also come out that one didn't even need to
    venture into the USA since the CIA kidnapped many people outside the USA
    to be sent to the secret "rendering" prisons to be tortured.


    When the Arar family started to look for their father, USA state
    department told Canadian Foreign Affairs dept that they had never heard
    of Arar and definititevely were not holding him. They knew full well
    what they had done to him. Bush finally admitted to our prime minister
    during a meeting what had happened.

    So BUSH WAS FULLY AWARE THAT TORTURE WAS BEING PERFORMED WELL BEFORE THE
    USA MEDIA STARTED TO ADMIT IT TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

    The rest of the world cannot understand why the USA, which almost
    impeached a president for lying about a blow job in the oval office,
    allows a war criminal to continue to be president of the USA.

  10. Re: July the 4th

    On Jul 29, 12:35 pm, JF Mezei wrote:
    > AEF wrote:
    > > The compensation ends a lawsuit brought by Mr. Arar and follows a
    > > recommendation from a judicial inquiry into his case. That inquiry
    > > said the expulsion to Syria was caused by FALSE ASSERTIONS MADE BY THE
    > > CANADIAN POLICE TO UNITED STATES OFFICIALS, SAYING THAT MR. ARAR WAS
    > > AN ISLAMIC EXTREMIST LINKED TO AL QAEDA. [my emphasis].

    >
    > > So *your* gov't is also to blame!!! But at least it admitted guilt in
    > > the end.

    >
    > You need to take a look at the big picture. Intelligence agencies and
    > police USED to exchange a lot of information with the americans, and
    > information was "qualified". In the case of Arar, he had once met
    > someone who was being watched. The person being watched wasn't a
    > declared terrorist, he was just suspected of having ties. So this was
    > entered in the CSIS database as such and sent the the yanks as part of
    > regular bulk exchanges.
    >
    > The problem is that the yanks stopped reading the reports to qualify
    > each entry and just treated all entries as "known terrorist".
    >
    > The failure of the canadian government was to continue to send such bulk
    > reports at a time they should have known that the yank were misusing
    > that information and no longer considering privacy issues.


    That contradicts the NY Times article I quoted from. Why should I
    believe you over the Times?

    >
    > A LOT of non-americans were given the "terrorist treatment" when they
    > casually ventured into the USA for business, transit, vacation, or
    > visiting family. And it has also come out that one didn't even need to
    > venture into the USA since the CIA kidnapped many people outside the USA
    > to be sent to the secret "rendering" prisons to be tortured.


    Fine. But this is moving away from what you were saying before. Yes,
    some terrible things have happened under Bush.

    >
    > When the Arar family started to look for their father, USA state
    > department told Canadian Foreign Affairs dept that they had never heard
    > of Arar and definititevely were not holding him. They knew full well
    > what they had done to him. Bush finally admitted to our prime minister
    > during a meeting what had happened.
    >
    > So BUSH WAS FULLY AWARE THAT TORTURE WAS BEING PERFORMED WELL BEFORE THE
    > USA MEDIA STARTED TO ADMIT IT TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.


    Still the US has a far better record than many other countries,
    espcially Saddam's Iraq. I'm not saying the US has been perfectly
    good. NO COUNTRY HAS BEEN. But your statements implying Iraq under
    Saddam was OK to live in as long as you didn't say anything against
    his regime (Well, if that happened in the US you'd be screaming bloody
    murder).

    It is your double standard I object to the most, which makes you an
    anti-American bigot.

    > The rest of the world cannot understand why the USA, which almost
    > impeached a president for lying about a blow job in the oval office,
    > allows a war criminal to continue to be president of the USA.


    AEF


  11. Re: July the 4th

    On 07/28/07 19:12, JF Mezei wrote:
    > AEF wrote:
    >
    >> I don't think any people within the US are denied legal process unless
    >> you consider Gitmo part of the US.

    >
    > The USA ambassador to Canada stated categorically that non-citizens had
    > no legal rights in the USA. (trying to explain why the USA had kidnapped
    > a canadian at JFK airport and sent him to be tortured in Syria).


    Which is categorically false, given the quantity of rights and
    privileges that illegal immigrants have in this country.

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  12. Re: July the 4th

    In article <970d1$46aa2805$cef8887a$17184@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei writes:
    >
    > You can't tell others they can't have while the USA insists that it
    > can have


    Sure you can, King George does it all the time. Doesn't work very
    well, but that's harldy unique for King George.

  13. Re: July the 4th

    In article <7013$46abdbe2$cef8887a$8663@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei writes:
    >
    > The USA ambassador to Canada stated categorically that non-citizens had
    > no legal rights in the USA. (trying to explain why the USA had kidnapped
    > a canadian at JFK airport and sent him to be tortured in Syria).


    The US Ambasador to Canada is a member of the Bush Administration
    which doesn't believe citizens have rights in the USA. Its hardly
    unexpected that non-citizens have no rights, either.


+ Reply to Thread