where's the good in bush? - Page 3 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

DJ Happy · 10-20-2004, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Harry, I define terrorism as an act of violence that is meant to cause political change.

That would make war an act of terrorism. Which would make the US terrorists. Will you invade yourselves once you're finished with Iraq and Jodie Foster?

daswig · 10-20-2004, 12:13 AM

DJ happy, OK, throw in the word "illegal" before the word "act". Better?

daswig · 10-20-2004, 12:15 AM

Sirhan Sirhan claimed after the shooting that he shot him because of his stance on Israel.

high_jinx · 10-20-2004, 12:19 AM

get a room guys... or a cyber room with some webcams attached... anyway...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalibah

Add

Protects the sanctity of Marriage
Protects unborn Children
Protects embryos (stem cell )

to the list

ok... but you should know....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Also I like how Bush is a God fearing fundie, so sue me.

.... you'll be hearing from my lawyer.

DJ Happy · 10-20-2004, 12:22 AM

The invasion of Iraq has been declared illegal, so it doesn't really change anything.

Interestingly enough, your definition of terrorism is pretty much the same as the dictionary's, although to me it still doesn't sound complete enough. I would add the distinction of intentionally targeting civilians as well.

Mephisto2 · 10-20-2004, 01:01 AM

To be fair to daswig, his definition of terrorism is very close to that adopted by the US Government and defined in section 212 (a)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Quote:

The Immigration and Nationality Act defines terrorist activity to mean: any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed (or which, if committed in the United States, would be unlawful under the laws of the United States or any State) and which involves any of the following:

(I) The highjacking or sabotage of any conveyance (including an aircraft, vessel, or vehicle).

(II) The seizing or detaining, and threatening to kill, injure, or continue to detain, another individual in order to compel a third person (including a governmental organization) to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the individual seized or detained.

(III) A violent attack upon an internationally protected person (as defined in section 1116(b)(4) of title 18, United States Code) or upon the liberty of such a person.

(IV) An assassination.

(V) The use of any-

(a) biological agent, chemical agent, or nuclear weapon or device, or

(b) explosive or firearm (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.

(VI) A threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing.

(iii) The term "engage in terrorist activity" means to commit, in an individual capacity or as a member of an organization, an act of terrorist activity or an act which the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support to any individual, organization, or government in conducting a terrorist activity at any time, including any of the following acts:

(I) The preparation or planning of a terrorist activity.

(II) The gathering of information on potential targets for terrorist activity.

(III) The providing of any type of material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, false documentation or identification, weapons, explosives, or training, to any individual the actor knows or has reason to believe has committed or plans to commit a terrorist activity.

(IV) The soliciting of funds or other things of value for terrorist activity or for any terrorist organization.

(V) The solicitation of any individual for membership in a terrorist organization, terrorist government, or to engage in a terrorist activity

US Department of State - 2001 Report on Foreign Terrorist Organizations.
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/rpt/ft...cfm?docid=5258

So an assassination IS, under US law at least, terrorism.

Mr Mephisto

daswig · 10-20-2004, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ Happy

The invasion of Iraq has been declared illegal, so it doesn't really change anything.

Interestingly enough, your definition of terrorism is pretty much the same as the dictionary's, although to me it still doesn't sound complete enough. I would add the distinction of intentionally targeting civilians as well.

DJ Happy, declared illegal by what competent body? And please don't try to trot out Kofi...he's lucky he's not in prison now.

daswig · 10-20-2004, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

To be fair to daswig, his definition of terrorism is very close to that adopted by the US Government and defined in section 212 (a)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

US Department of State - 2001 Report on Foreign Terrorist Organizations.
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/rpt/ft...cfm?docid=5258

So an assassination IS, under US law at least, terrorism.

Mr Mephisto

Thanks, Mephisto. J.D.s with insomnia don't generally make shit up, but at the same time, if we're not creating billable hours, we do tend to go from memory.

Mephisto2 · 10-20-2004, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

DJ Happy, declared illegal by what competent body? And please don't try to trot out Kofi...he's lucky he's not in prison now.

Declared illegal by the United Nations; the only body that can do so.

And I'm absolutely GOBSMACKED... actually, I'm apalled at your comment on Kofi Annan.

You may not like him but he's one of the most respected men on the planet.

In PRISON?

What kind of drugs are you on? You've completely lost the plot now...

Mr Mephisto

Mephisto2 · 10-20-2004, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Thanks, Mephisto. J.D.s with insomnia don't generally make shit up, but at the same time, if we're not creating billable hours, we do tend to go from memory.

Hahaha... Bill them. Bill them ALL!

Mr Mephisto

daswig · 10-20-2004, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

And I'm absolutely GOBSMACKED... actually, I'm apalled at your comment on Kofi Annan.

Accepting bribes and peddling influence for personal profit is still a crime even for members of the UN, isn't it? Need we open the whole "Oil for Food" pandora's box?

DJ Happy · 10-20-2004, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

DJ Happy, declared illegal by what competent body? And please don't try to trot out Kofi...he's lucky he's not in prison now.

And you're lucky people still respond to you. Tell me, have you ever posted a link to substantiate your position in your life?

I will continue to say the UN and Kofi Annan as even if he personally accepted large briefcases full of dollar bills while sipping pina coladas on an Hawaiin sun lounger, it doesn't change the UN Charter definition of an illegal invasion (which was the same definition that was used when deciding to invade Iraq after Iraq illegally invaded Kuwait).

I will also say Richard Perle.

I will add to that the US Constitution.

Willravel · 10-20-2004, 08:07 AM

This was a preemptive war (can't argue with that). This was a war based, at least in the beginning, on weapons of mass destruction (can't argue with that). Geroge W. Bush has said that we did not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (can't argue with that, see the debates for proof). Therefore, we attacked Iraq because we thought they had WMD, but they didn't. Now I don't remember anyone apologizing for that. Actually, we still occupy Iraq. A preemptive war not based in truth on a body that never threatened the U.S. I don't know much about the law, but if there isn't a law against this, shouldn't there be?

We, the USA, are going to find ourselves in a bad position if someone decides to press charges in a world court. They say they need to charge people, we say no. They insist, we say no. What happnes next?

The good in Bush is that he is consistant. At least we know how he will respond. I suppose that's one of the few things he has over Kerry.

Mephisto2 · 10-20-2004, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Accepting bribes and peddling influence for personal profit is still a crime even for members of the UN, isn't it? Need we open the whole "Oil for Food" pandora's box?

If you're accusing Kofi Annan of personally being involved, then yes. Yes we do.

Otherwise, making unfounded accusations is still a crime, even for Americans, isn't it?

Mr Mephisto

Lebell · 10-20-2004, 01:00 PM

I see I've neglected to look at this thread too long.

DJ Happy, why don't you take a 24 hour "time out" with daswig.

Another one bites the dust.

10-20-2004, 01:00 PM	#95 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	I see I've neglected to look at this thread too long. DJ Happy, why don't you take a 24 hour "time out" with daswig. Another one bites the dust. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

10-20-2004, 12:13 AM	#82 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	DJ happy, OK, throw in the word "illegal" before the word "act". Better?

10-20-2004, 12:15 AM	#83 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	Sirhan Sirhan claimed after the shooting that he shot him because of his stance on Israel.

10-20-2004, 12:22 AM	#85 (permalink)
DJ Happy Psycho	The invasion of Iraq has been declared illegal, so it doesn't really change anything. Interestingly enough, your definition of terrorism is pretty much the same as the dictionary's, although to me it still doesn't sound complete enough. I would add the distinction of intentionally targeting civilians as well.

10-20-2004, 08:07 AM	#93 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	This was a preemptive war (can't argue with that). This was a war based, at least in the beginning, on weapons of mass destruction (can't argue with that). Geroge W. Bush has said that we did not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (can't argue with that, see the debates for proof). Therefore, we attacked Iraq because we thought they had WMD, but they didn't. Now I don't remember anyone apologizing for that. Actually, we still occupy Iraq. A preemptive war not based in truth on a body that never threatened the U.S. I don't know much about the law, but if there isn't a law against this, shouldn't there be? We, the USA, are going to find ourselves in a bad position if someone decides to press charges in a world court. They say they need to charge people, we say no. They insist, we say no. What happnes next? The good in Bush is that he is consistant. At least we know how he will respond. I suppose that's one of the few things he has over Kerry.