Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 116
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    I respect his service. I despise his politics, particularly his reference to the media as his "base".

    I think he is self-serving enough to have leaked something like this. We'll see soon enough.
    "Despise?" We are Americans. We disagree with another's politics, we do not despise. You did not open this thread to question, inform, or enlighten. You opened it to spew venom, anger, and hate. I leave it to you. I hope everyone else will do the same.
  2.    #62  
    Ooooh! I am cut to the quick!

    I am long past gentle disagreement with my political enemies, and I number McCain among those. His unconstitutional campaign finance reform law, his support for stealth gun control, his undercutting of the president during a war are all actions that have earned my disdain. Maybe despise is too weak of a word? Maybe I should have used loathe.

    Getting back to your comment, "We are Americans. We disagree with another's politics, we do not despise", you're joking right?
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Still want that investigation 1911 or is it no big deal now?

    Also this just in, the CIA has asked The Justice Department to investigate the matter.
    As a Republican, I'd still want that investigation, regardless of the leak's political affiliations. This is a serious breach of national and international security, and whoever is responsible for it should be prosecuted and punished. I don't care if it was Kennedy, Clinton, Lott, or McCain, they were wrong for doing it and need to be exposed.

    Whoever it was is not a patriot.
    I'm back!
  4. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #64  
    Have't heard much about as of late. Wonder why?
  5.    #65  
    Trent Lott backpedaled on his statement. DOJ was investigating the last I heard.
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Whoever it was is not a patriot.
    I have thought a little bit about this...why are they not a patriot?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  7. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Trent Lott backpedaled on his statement. DOJ was investigating the last I heard.
    You would figure. Could you produce his new statements for us so we can see, thanks.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I have thought a little bit about this...why are they not a patriot?
    It is easy to be patriot if pleasing 1911 meets the standard. If one wants to satisfy the Rule of Law, it gets tougher.
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I have thought a little bit about this...why are they not a patriot?
    Let's be honest. Whoever did this is not looking to protect some random terrorists from getting what they deserve. They did this to embarrass the current administration, or to further their own political agenda and/or career.

    To me, you're not a patriot if you put yourself ahead of your country.
    I'm back!
  10. #70  
    Terrorist ? Torture info out, shoot em' !
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Let's be honest. Whoever did this is not looking to protect some random terrorists from getting what they deserve.
    Hmm...what do you think 'random' terrorists deserve as far as treatment? (Obviously you don't have to answer that, Im just interested in why you framed the statement that way.)

    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    They did this to embarrass the current administration, or to further their own political agenda and/or career.
    I can see the embarrassment of the administration part...but to counter...the admin would not be embarrassed if they were doing things 'above board'? If what they are doing is completely legal...then who cares if someone says something? (Setting aside the National Security argument).

    As far as the furthering political agenda/career argument...how? If we don't have a name to give the person 'credit' for whistleblowing, then how is it benefitting them in the way that you described?

    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    To me, you're not a patriot if you put yourself ahead of your country.
    I agree. My argument would be that by telling everyone what we are doing (assuming the administration is doing something illegal) is actually putting their country above their themselves because we all (should) care that we are following the rule of law and by whistleblowing, the source is taking a HUGE political/legal risk not just to himself but many of the people he/she knows.

    Reminds me of a good movie with Pacino and Crowe (The Insider).
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Let's be honest.......

    ......To me, you're not a patriot if you put yourself ahead of your country.
    Indeed, let's be honest. "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." What should set us apart from the rest of the world is that we put the Rule of Law and the Constitution ahead of the government and our own responsibility ahead of that of the chief of state. If we have any claim to the right to go galavanting around the world involving ourselves in the affairs of others, then that claim must be rooted in Law. If we can do it within the Law, fine; if not then we may not.

    Democracy is an interesting form of government; it is the only one that cannot be imposed by force. If force is required, then it is not democracy. We should have learned that lesson in Vietnam. We seem to have learned a lot while missing that.

    Our Cowboy POTUS does not get an exemption from the Rule of Law by unilaterally declaring a war. Blind loyalty to him is not patriotism. For us, patriotism must begin with a commitment to the Constitution. Patriotism is a commitment to the Constitution, not the Cowboy of the Day. The Constitution puts the authority to declare war in the Congress, not the executive.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Hmm...what do you think 'random' terrorists deserve as far as treatment?
    Funny you should ask.

    Under the Rule of Law, they are entitled to due process. At an absolute minimum, that would include a determination by a magistrate with appropriate jurisdiction that they are terrorists. Summary execution of someone in civilian garb is different from killing a warrior in uniform. A simple declaration by the executioner does not suffice.

    Our vigilante POTUS does not want such a determination. A determination that someone is a "terrorist" might make summary punishment legitimate. On the other hand, a court might find that it is a substitute for a uniform, that while it gives the right to summary execution for a terrorist at large, it might require humane treatment for one in captivity. POTUS prefers the ambiguity; he does not want the question resolved. That makes him Lord High Executioner in Chief.
  14.    #74  
    "Democracy is an interesting form of government; it is the only one that cannot be imposed by force. If force is required, then it is not democracy. We should have learned that lesson in Vietnam. We seem to have learned a lot while missing that."

    Interesting news! I'll inform Hitler and Hirohito that it was all a big misunderstanding and that the current democratically elected governments of Germany and Japan are illegitimate because democracy was forced upon their populations.
  15.    #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    Funny you should ask.

    Under the Rule of Law, they are entitled to due process. At an absolute minimum, that would include a determination by a magistrate with appropriate jurisdiction that they are terrorists. Summary execution of someone in civilian garb is different from killing a warrior in uniform. A simple declaration by the executioner does not suffice.

    Our vigilante POTUS does not want such a determination. A determination that someone is a "terrorist" might make summary punishment legitimate. On the other hand, a court might find that it is a substitute for a uniform, that while it gives the right to summary execution for a terrorist at large, it might require humane treatment for one in captivity. POTUS prefers the ambiguity; he does not want the question resolved. That makes him Lord High Executioner in Chief.

    The "magistrate" you refer to is a military tribunal...just like what the German sabateours got.
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    "Democracy is an interesting form of government; it is the only one that cannot be imposed by force. If force is required, then it is not democracy. We should have learned that lesson in Vietnam. We seem to have learned a lot while missing that."

    Interesting news! I'll inform Hitler and Hirohito that it was all a big misunderstanding and that the current democratically elected governments of Germany and Japan are illegitimate because democracy was forced upon their populations.
    Arguable. The Germans chose democracy after the Great War. It was called the Wiemar Republic. It was wrested from them by a violent minority, a lesson for us. You might want to compare what happened in the West to what happened in the East before deciding that we "forced" democracy on the Germans.

    I was in Japan at the time of the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the end of the occupation. Admittedly, I could only read the English versions of the papers. However, they were universally flattering. We were credited for the most benign and generous occupation in the history of the world. We were given credit for leaving, to the extent that we did, and staying, to the extent that we have, voluntarily and on a timely basis.

    Admittedly, MacArthur was a warrior in charge of an occupation and he did exercise conisderable influence over the drafting of the Japanese Constitution. There was considerable conservative resisitance. However, That was half a century ago. The Japanese are certainly not under coercion today. The "MacArthur" Constitution, if that is what it was, persists pretty much in tact today. The Constitution enjoys the support of the head of state, even though it moved him from the status of God to that of constitutional monarch. MacArthur left Japan more a hero to the Japanese than he is to us. His reputation there today is certainly better than it is here.

    Please do not get me wrong. I am not defending American imperialism or our policy of "unconditional surrender" but its limits. I am not defending our occupations of Germany and Japan as much as my thesis that Democracy, by definition, requires the consent of the governed.

    [I thought that I had unsubscribed from this list. What am I doing here?]
    Last edited by whmurray; 11/18/2005 at 10:48 AM.
  17.    #77  
    "Consent of the governed."

    Do you not call lines of people braving suicide bombers so that they might dip their fingers in purple ink the ultimate consent?

    Do you deem our policy of enabling this process imperial? Perhaps it is so, but certainly not in any form previously seen. We are unique in our belief that free people participating in a democracy provides our natoin security. I can think of no other nation in the history of mankind that has so actively sought this goal, or sacrificed so much to achieve it.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    "Consent of the governed."

    Do you not call lines of people braving suicide bombers so that they might dip their fingers in purple ink the ultimate consent?
    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Do you deem our policy of enabling this process imperial?
    Hard to know. It is a pre-emptive war. Many of those wars that we started were imperial. I grew up believing that we had never fired the first shot. Now I know better. The test will be how long we are there.


    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Perhaps it is so, but certainly not in any form previously seen. We are unique in our belief that free people participating in a democracy provides our natoin security. I can think of no other nation in the history of mankind that has so actively sought this goal, or sacrificed so much to achieve it.
    Perhaps. It is clear that the two World Wars were not imperial. The wars of native extermination, the War with Mexico, and the Spanish American War clearly were. Many of the others have not been so clear.
  19. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #79  
    Wondering how the investagation is going on this subject?
  20. #80  
    If they exist or who leaked them?
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions