A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 1st 09, 06:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Neil Harrington[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 663
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Neil
Harrington writes

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Bill Graham
writes

"J. Clarke" wrote in message news:h9tef91qgs@n
ews6.newsguy.com...
tony cooper wrote:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:44:17 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Be sure to write the first time you encounter a CHP officer with
your
idea that you have an inherent right to carry a concealed weapon
without a permit. I'd be interested to see how that plays out.

I have spent many happy hours arguing exactly that with California
Police officers......My wife's grandson-in-law happens to be one. In
many cases they agree with my position on the matter.

This is the ChrisH School of Reasoning. If you know one person who
shares your opinion, that means "everyone" agrees with you.

I had a police officer explain matters to me this way:

"If you shoot me when I come to enforce a gun ban, I won't hold it
against
you."

Many police disagree with some of the laws that they are required to
enforce, but they do their jobs anyway.

They shouldn't. "It is the responsibility, not the right, of good men
to disobey bad laws." - Spencer Tracy, in "Judgment at Nuremberg."

So how come the US military is still using torture and the excuse is
they were just following orders?


No discussion of U.S. military "torture" can be complete without a reading
of Ann Coulter's column on the subject, which puts it somewhat in
perspective:

________________________________

WATCHING MSNBC IS TORTURE
May 6, 2009

The media wail about "torture," but are noticeably short on facts.

Liberals try to disguise the utter wussification of our interrogation
techniques by constantly prattling on about "the banality of evil."


What a load of CRAP to excuse torture by the US.
All you need is the Geneva convention.


The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military force. If
you think it does, show me where.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no rights at
all -- they can be and have been just executed on the spot. That's been the
rule for at least a few hundred years.

Now I think any reasonable person would admit that a little waterboarding is
kinder and more generous treatment than being summarily executed.


  #2  
Old October 1st 09, 06:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message


[...]

The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military
force. If you think it does, show me where.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no
rights at all -- they can be and have been just executed on the spot.
That's been the rule for at least a few hundred years.


Every person has rights. Many of the detainees at Guananemo have been shown
to have not been involved in terrorist activities and were captured by
mistake. That is why civilised countries insist on the rule of law, where
no person may be detained without due process, something the Bush
administration fought every step of the way. It is not acceptable to merely
deem someone a terrorist or a criminal by fiat. It must be established by
evidence.

Now I think any reasonable person would admit that a little
waterboarding is kinder and more generous treatment than being
summarily executed.


There is no such thing as "a little waterboarding". It is torture and under
the terms of the international agreement signed by Ronald Reagan and
ratified by the US Senate America has no lawful option but to prosecute
those who engaged in it.



  #3  
Old October 1st 09, 06:29 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Ray Fischer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,136
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

Neil Harrington wrote:

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Neil
Harrington writes

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Bill Graham
writes

"J. Clarke" wrote in message news:h9tef91qgs@n
ews6.newsguy.com...
tony cooper wrote:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:44:17 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Be sure to write the first time you encounter a CHP officer with
your
idea that you have an inherent right to carry a concealed weapon
without a permit. I'd be interested to see how that plays out.

I have spent many happy hours arguing exactly that with California
Police officers......My wife's grandson-in-law happens to be one. In
many cases they agree with my position on the matter.

This is the ChrisH School of Reasoning. If you know one person who
shares your opinion, that means "everyone" agrees with you.

I had a police officer explain matters to me this way:

"If you shoot me when I come to enforce a gun ban, I won't hold it
against
you."

Many police disagree with some of the laws that they are required to
enforce, but they do their jobs anyway.

They shouldn't. "It is the responsibility, not the right, of good men
to disobey bad laws." - Spencer Tracy, in "Judgment at Nuremberg."

So how come the US military is still using torture and the excuse is
they were just following orders?

No discussion of U.S. military "torture" can be complete without a reading
of Ann Coulter's column on the subject, which puts it somewhat in
perspective:

________________________________

WATCHING MSNBC IS TORTURE
May 6, 2009

The media wail about "torture," but are noticeably short on facts.

Liberals try to disguise the utter wussification of our interrogation
techniques by constantly prattling on about "the banality of evil."


What a load of CRAP to excuse torture by the US.
All you need is the Geneva convention.


The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military force. If
you think it does, show me where.


If they're not covered by the Geneva Convention then they're covered
by the US Constitution.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no rights at
all


Just like Jews didn't have any rights according to the Nazis.

--
Ray Fischer


  #4  
Old October 1st 09, 06:39 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Chris H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,283
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

In message , Neil
Harrington writes

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Neil
Harrington writes

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Bill Graham
writes

"J. Clarke" wrote in message news:h9tef91qgs@n
ews6.newsguy.com...
tony cooper wrote:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:44:17 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Be sure to write the first time you encounter a CHP officer with
your
idea that you have an inherent right to carry a concealed weapon
without a permit. I'd be interested to see how that plays out.

I have spent many happy hours arguing exactly that with California
Police officers......My wife's grandson-in-law happens to be one. In
many cases they agree with my position on the matter.

This is the ChrisH School of Reasoning. If you know one person who
shares your opinion, that means "everyone" agrees with you.

I had a police officer explain matters to me this way:

"If you shoot me when I come to enforce a gun ban, I won't hold it
against
you."

Many police disagree with some of the laws that they are required to
enforce, but they do their jobs anyway.

They shouldn't. "It is the responsibility, not the right, of good men
to disobey bad laws." - Spencer Tracy, in "Judgment at Nuremberg."

So how come the US military is still using torture and the excuse is
they were just following orders?

No discussion of U.S. military "torture" can be complete without a reading
of Ann Coulter's column on the subject, which puts it somewhat in
perspective:

________________________________

WATCHING MSNBC IS TORTURE
May 6, 2009

The media wail about "torture," but are noticeably short on facts.

Liberals try to disguise the utter wussification of our interrogation
techniques by constantly prattling on about "the banality of evil."


What a load of CRAP to excuse torture by the US.
All you need is the Geneva convention.


The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military force. If
you think it does, show me where.


It does not... they are civilians and criminals. Thus they come under
civilian law.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no rights at
all --

Yes they do they are civilian criminals and come under due process.
torture is not part of that process.

Those are the ONLY two options.
The "third option" is used by the axis of evil ie China, N. Korea, Iran,
Israel and the USA to torture civilians
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



  #5  
Old October 1st 09, 06:47 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Chris H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,283
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

In message , DRS
writes
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message


[...]

The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military
force. If you think it does, show me where.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no
rights at all -- they can be and have been just executed on the spot.
That's been the rule for at least a few hundred years.


Every person has rights. Many of the detainees at Guananemo have been shown
to have not been involved in terrorist activities and were captured by
mistake.


However the experience of several years illegal detention and torture
turned most of them and their families into at least sympathisers of Al-
Qeada.

That is why civilised countries insist on the rule of law, where
no person may be detained without due process, something the Bush
administration fought every step of the way.


And why the US is seen as a rouge stage by most of the world.

It is not acceptable to merely
deem someone a terrorist or a criminal by fiat. It must be established by
evidence.


Afghanistan offered to give OBL to the US is the USA had any credible
evidence.... the USA could not produce any evidence and the Afghans did
not turn him over. SO the USA illegally invaded.

Now I think any reasonable person would admit that a little
waterboarding is kinder and more generous treatment than being
summarily executed.


There is no such thing as "a little waterboarding". It is torture and under
the terms of the international agreement signed by Ronald Reagan and
ratified by the US Senate America has no lawful option but to prosecute
those who engaged in it.


Agreed. The right wing in the USA sound just like the N.Koreans, Chinese
and the Israelis.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



  #6  
Old October 1st 09, 07:07 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 430
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

"Chris H" wrote in message

In message , DRS
writes


[...]

And why the US is seen as a rouge stage by most of the world.


A rouge state? Only by the wingnuts in here.

It is not acceptable to merely
deem someone a terrorist or a criminal by fiat. It must be
established by evidence.


Afghanistan offered to give OBL to the US is the USA had any credible
evidence.... the USA could not produce any evidence and the Afghans
did not turn him over. SO the USA illegally invaded.


There is genuine dispute among international jurists about the legitimacy of
the Taliban government given the state of armed resistance to it. The
invasion of Iraq was unquestionably illegal but the invasion of Afghanistan
is legally ambiguous.



  #7  
Old October 1st 09, 07:08 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Bill Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,294
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"DRS" wrote in message
. au...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message


[...]

The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military
force. If you think it does, show me where.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no
rights at all -- they can be and have been just executed on the spot.
That's been the rule for at least a few hundred years.


Every person has rights. Many of the detainees at Guananemo have been
shown to have not been involved in terrorist activities and were captured
by mistake. That is why civilised countries insist on the rule of law,
where no person may be detained without due process, something the Bush
administration fought every step of the way. It is not acceptable to
merely deem someone a terrorist or a criminal by fiat. It must be
established by evidence.


In wartime, anyone who is a citizen of the other side that is caught out of
uniform in your territory is a spy, and can be shot unceremoniously. So, the
argument comes down to things like: Are we really in "wartime"? Who is a
citizen of, "The other side"? - Is there an, "other side"? What is the other
sides, "Uniform"? IOW, things are a lot more complicated that they at first
seem. And there certainly is lots of room for argument over what is
acceptable and what is not.

  #8  
Old October 1st 09, 07:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Walter Banks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 803
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!



Bill Graham wrote:

In wartime, anyone who is a citizen of the other side that is caught out of
uniform in your territory is a spy, and can be shot unceremoniously.


What about citizens of the other side in their own territory. Many in
GitMo were arrested in Afghanistan and Iraq

So, the
argument comes down to things like: Are we really in "wartime"? Who is a
citizen of, "The other side"? - Is there an, "other side"? What is the other
sides, "Uniform"? IOW, things are a lot more complicated that they at first
seem. And there certainly is lots of room for argument over what is
acceptable and what is not.


Some good points Bill..

Few seem to be arguing the arrest, most are arguing due process what
ever that may be. Treatment of detained persons is a real issue with
many different consequences. One of the few politicians in the US that
has thought this through is McCain.

w..



  #9  
Old October 1st 09, 07:24 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Bill Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,294
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!


"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , DRS
writes
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message


[...]

The Geneva Convention does not, as far as I know, offer any protection
whatever to combatants who are not part of any recognized military
force. If you think it does, show me where.

Combatants captured not in proper uniform are not POWs and have no
rights at all -- they can be and have been just executed on the spot.
That's been the rule for at least a few hundred years.


Every person has rights. Many of the detainees at Guananemo have been
shown
to have not been involved in terrorist activities and were captured by
mistake.


However the experience of several years illegal detention and torture
turned most of them and their families into at least sympathisers of Al-
Qeada.

That is why civilised countries insist on the rule of law, where
no person may be detained without due process, something the Bush
administration fought every step of the way.


And why the US is seen as a rouge stage by most of the world.

It is not acceptable to merely
deem someone a terrorist or a criminal by fiat. It must be established by
evidence.


Afghanistan offered to give OBL to the US is the USA had any credible
evidence.... the USA could not produce any evidence and the Afghans did
not turn him over. SO the USA illegally invaded.

Now I think any reasonable person would admit that a little
waterboarding is kinder and more generous treatment than being
summarily executed.


There is no such thing as "a little waterboarding". It is torture and
under
the terms of the international agreement signed by Ronald Reagan and
ratified by the US Senate America has no lawful option but to prosecute
those who engaged in it.


Agreed. The right wing in the USA sound just like the N.Koreans, Chinese
and the Israelis.

Torture is not black and white. It exists in nearly infinite degrees, just
like most other things. You can be slightly uncomfortable, like when you are
waiting in line for your welfare check. Or, you can be slowly burned to
death. So, torture has to be carefully defined, or any laws made about it
are meaningless. As a result, the argument that you guys are carrying on can
have no resolution, because the terms have not been carefully defined. IOW,
you are wasting your time.

  #10  
Old October 1st 09, 07:29 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Chris H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,283
Default The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!

In message , DRS
writes
"Chris H" wrote in message

In message , DRS
writes


[...]

And why the US is seen as a rouge stage by most of the world.


A rouge state? Only by the wingnuts in here.

It is not acceptable to merely
deem someone a terrorist or a criminal by fiat. It must be
established by evidence.


Afghanistan offered to give OBL to the US is the USA had any credible
evidence.... the USA could not produce any evidence and the Afghans
did not turn him over. SO the USA illegally invaded.


There is genuine dispute among international jurists about the legitimacy of
the Taliban government given the state of armed resistance to it.


Several countries recognised it. Also just because there is a civil war
it does not give anyone external the right to invade.

BTW the Russians in Afghanistan were invited in be the legitimate
government yet the USA armed and trained the terrorists including Al-
Qeada and those who became the Taliban.

However that is separate to the illegality of the invasion.

Also the only way an irregular army can survive is if the people support
them and after 8 years I think the answer is obvious.

The
invasion of Iraq was unquestionably illegal


I think you are right but in the UK at least there is no definitive
answer and there wont be for about 18 months

but the invasion of Afghanistan
is legally ambiguous.


I agree but I think 8 years on it is a bit irrelevant now. The
question is how many decades will it take to get out without loosing too
badly.

The US may wind up having to do it alone.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Chris H 35mm Photo Equipment 0 October 1st 09 08:24 AM
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Bill Graham 35mm Photo Equipment 0 September 17th 09 11:21 PM
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Bill Graham 35mm Photo Equipment 0 September 17th 09 11:14 PM
The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!! Bill Graham 35mm Photo Equipment 0 September 17th 09 11:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.