"suspected" == guilty.

Post #25,609 by Brandioch 1/24/02 6:01:09 PM Reply	"suspected" == guilty. Which was my point. They're turning over PRISONERS. Now, what does the Geneva Convention say about PRISONERS? Oh, sorry, they're not prisoners. It wasn't a war. Our military was just there for what reason? I would suggest you take some time and read the Geneva Conventions. Oh, they are MILITARY prisoners. They're suspected terrorists. None of them are Taliban military. Don't tell me what you've been told. Tell me whether you believe that none of them are Taliban military.
Post #25,687 by drewk 1/25/02 9:16:52 AM Reply	So now I'm the final authority? Don't tell me what you've been told. Tell me whether you believe that none of them are Taliban military. So it doesn't matter what the local government says. Nor the fact that there already is a body in place acting as one of the parties described in the Geneva Convention. Because you question their legitimacy, or their motives, or for some other reason their quailification to make such a classification, then I am free to replace their judgement with my own. That's good to know. As long as I'm the final arbiter of all this, I guess we can stop discussing it and just give me a few hours to write up a plan. We have to fight the terrorists as if there were no rules and preserve our open society as if there were no terrorists. -- [link\|http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/opinion/BIO-FRIEDMAN.html\|Thomas Friedman]
Post #25,748 by Brandioch 1/25/02 3:47:56 PM Reply	Do you believe in Santa Claus? Do you believe in the Easter Bunny? "Because you question their legitimacy, or their motives, or for some other reason their quailification to make such a classification, then I am free to replace their judgement with my own." Nope. You don't have the authority. Just tell me whether you believe that they're all spies/terrorists/merc/etc. Anything other than POW's. It seems like a simple request to me.
Post #25,764 by bepatient 1/25/02 4:46:36 PM Reply	The classic flip. I say X...prove Y or my X is correct. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #25,766 by Brandioch 1/25/02 4:54:34 PM Reply	F.I. Functionally illiterate. No. This is not about proving anymore. I'm simply asking Drew if he believes what he's been told about them. I don't expect you to be able to understand that. You seem to have a bit of trouble with fact/fantasy.
Post #25,825 by Mike 1/26/02 12:26:06 AM Reply	Soooooooooooo doubt everything right? I think I would agree. I question the authorities when they say that the detainees are not being given POW status. I say they ARE......but they're just not telling us about it. --------Streak of batpiss---------
Post #25,856 by bepatient 1/26/02 10:44:42 AM Reply	Shhhh... its not the truth unless someone links to it in a reponse to a Brandioch post. Doubt him or question him? Please...you must be unable to read...besides..the burden of proof never rests there...always here. Nudge. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #25,857 by Mike 1/26/02 11:20:55 AM Reply	:-) NT --------Streak of batpiss---------
Post #25,866 by Brandioch 1/26/02 1:45:32 PM Reply	Thank you Drew, Drew and Drew. Amazing, I asked Drew for his opinion on a subject and instead of a reply from Drew I get "replies" from Bill and Mike. The word "replies" is in quotes because, although their posts did follow my post, they did not answer the question posed to Drew. At which point will I realize that having a "discussion" with someone involves their replies to actually address the my points? Oh, I already have realized this. That is why I consider Bill to be functionally illiterate. He is capable of nothing more that endless repetion of his previously held beliefs and personal insults. He cannot understand a reference (except to endlessly demand them) nor can he understand basic logic (except to endlessly repeat his opinion). Mike, please see the above paragraph and replace "Bill" with "Mike". If you can. In the future, if you would be so kind, please do not replace "Drew" with either "Bill" nor "Mike". If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.
Post #25,877 by bepatient 1/26/02 2:38:54 PM Reply	Was talking to Mike...do you mind? And he says >I< can't read. Wow. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #25,864 by Ashton 1/26/02 1:26:35 PM Reply	LRPD wryly notes: I'm sorry, I came here for an argument! Yup, when your logic fails, it's good strategy to ridicule the process that made the rebuttal ultimately LAM,E (sq). Of course it's UnMurican to imagine that Our Government agencies might ever actually spin anything - to us! No.. wait: Actually that seems to be the reason we provided so many checks & balances and have to keep looking for end-runs around em: after each new one is finally noticed. I guess it's much more comfortable just to .. believe, though. Yep: 100% accuracy in the er Selected Detainees. Sounds right to me - but why should I depend on just my mentation - when my govt. will do it for me? Still and all - these little exchanges seem to be much lengthier than rilly Smart folk would need: as all those previous sentences have to be scanned-in again and linked to - for the short attention span of some readers who just plumb forgot what was said. Could it be that some only have an 8K cache and an old Seagate 5mB disk in there? Poverty is everywhere.. What was that word? Obtuse? yeah that seems to fit, specially when it's intentional. Ashton er.. I forget - what were the sour grapes?

Welcome to IWETHEY!