Re: Navy

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:58:56 -0700, "Leadfoot" <notspam@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


"W. D. Allen" <ballensr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:DqCdnR-UtZuYi1jZnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Does this guy believe everything he reads in the liberal press?

Liberal press, what a myth. Maybe you'd like a little censorship of the news
you don't like

I think the reference was to the acceptance of assertions that later
wind up unsupported. See more below:

Where was he
on 9/11/01?

I don't know about him but I was watching it on TV and saw the second plane
hit live Gald we took care of business in Afghanistan but wonder why Bush
can't catch Bin-Laden.

Why the focus on one individual? Certainly he is a target, but finding
one person, particularly in a range of supporting countries can be
difficult. We often find it difficult to find wanted individuals right
here in the US. Dismantling his organization, freezing his funds,
uncovering his plots, etc. seems to be having some impact.

And what the hell does military service have to do with getting it right?

It gives you a better perspective than the average citizen

Possibly, but the correllation can be pretty small.

From someone with twenty two years military service,

I spent six and i'm sickened by the things Bush and his despicable cronies
stand for

An illegal and rather stupidly thought out war in Iraq. Wrong war, wrong
place, wrong time

Seems that establishment of a democracy reflective of the majority
population in Iraq is a reasonable by-product. Removal of the tyrant
isn't bad either. But, there's the question of WMD, isn't there? Like
those 500 binary chemical rounds recently unearthed...Or, the linkage
to al-Qaeda, the basing of al-Zarqawi notwithstanding...Or, the
support of terrorism in other regional countries like Saudi, Kuwait
and eastern Turkey...

Torture

Yeah, wearing your jockeys on your head is pretty brutal. Abu Ghraib
was a failure of leadership in a big way at the brigade level and
below. It wasn't national policy.

Detention without trial

Geneva Conventions applied to signatory nations and uniformed
military. UCMJ applies to members of our service. US law applies
within our borders and not to prisoners taken in combat and
particularly not when civil trials would do nothing more than provide
a forum for jihadist propaganda. Military tribunals were the proposed
solution, but apparently some members of the US left don't want that
to happen. So, we get detention until we find a way to try within the
parameters set by the political argument. Oh, and don't forget that
when we want to release some of these folks, their former countries
don't want them back!

Blanket spying without consent of the judiciary

Excuse me? Would you be referring to the USA Today piece about
wireless records that was rescinded when Sprint and Verizon said it
didn't happen for their customers and ATT hasn't commented?


t r u t h o u t | Letter

Saturday 04 March 2006

Forwarded from Marni Harmony, the minister of a church in Orlando. Joe is
one of her parishioners.

Is it just me or does "Ms Rev Marni Harmony" sound like some sort of
parody?

Dear Mr. President:

Until your administration, I believed it was inconceivable that the
United States would ever initiate an aggressive and preemptive war against a
country that posed no threat to us.

Opinion, but hardly iron-clad when considering terrorist threats.

Until your administration, I thought it was
impossible for our nation to take hundreds of persons into custody
without provable charges of any kind,

Wouldn't apprehension in terrorist training camps or attacks be some
sort of reasonably provable charge? Does this twit think these folks
were scooped up off the streets of New York and hustled off to
internment camps?

and to "disappear" them into holes like
Gitmo, Abu Ghraib and Bagram.

Is there something about "disappear" that seems incongruent with the
news coverage of these places?

Until your administration, in my wildest legal fantasy
I could not imagine a US Attorney General seeking to justify torture or a
President first stating his intent to veto an anti-torture law, and then
adding a "signing statement" that he intends to ignore such law as he sees fit.

The job of the AG is to advice the President. Certainly it would be
reasonable to ask for an interpretation regarding what were the limits
of allowable stress for interrogations. Playing patty-cake with folks
who want to kill you isn't very effective.

But, then when we got law-makers involved with get restrictions on
"torture, degrading and humiliating" treatment of prisoners. While I
don't condone torture, I would reasonably expect that any prisoner is
going to be degraded and humiliated. It comes with capture.

As a citizen, a patriot, a parent and grandparent, a lawyer and law
teacher

Wow, a lawyer and law teacher who is so superficial in analysis. Scary
stuff!

I am left with such a feeling of loss and helplessness. I think of myself
as a good American and I ask myself what can I do when I see the face of evil?

Hyperbole. The face of evil looks a lot more like Sadaam, Usama, or
Kim Jung Il.

But my vote has become
meaningless because I live in a safe district drawn by your political
party.

You mean Bush 43 invented gerrymandering for political purposes? We
probably don't want to tell Representative Gerry, a signer of the
Constitution about that--he'd be spinning in his grave.

And I am a disciplined pacifist, so any
violent act is out of the question.

How did this guy earn his pay with that Naval commission and aviator
rating?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com
.