Forget Gitmo?

GuanYin

Hobbes wrote:

The immigration form you fill out in the airport and you hand it over before getting on the plane from Ireland to the US, they put a piece into your passport and away you go.

You're referring to direct Dublin-US flights only I assume?

On the airplane you fill out a customs form.

My account isn't with Aer lingus. BA and AF are the two airlines I fly with and both are on plane forms.

It is only the Dublin (maybe Shannon too) to US you have to do this. Other places you fill it out on the plane.

Fair enough. It makes sense if its an agreement on direct flights. It may explain why security checks are so much more excessive in Dublin that other european ports.

Its still the exception to the rule though.

FatherTed

Yeah Hobbes is correct, all INS stuff is done in SNN/DUB BEFORE you get on the plane. Whether you are a US citizen or not, you have to present yourself to the INS officials at SNN/DUB before boarding the plane. When flying from SNN/DUB you do not have to go through INS on the US end. In other words, INS at SNN/DUB=INS in USA.

It is different than other places. When flying from other than SNN/DUB you have to fill out that INS form on the plane and go through INS when you land on the US end.

wiseones2cents

psi wrote:

Evidence is mounting, its not the same as proof.

It is pretty suspicious, I'll give you that, it may well be the US are opting-out of these laws because they are guilty of them.

On the other hand, it may be that their excuse is true, they may feel some of these pacts will compromise their security. I'll wait for the evidence before I go accusing anyone of anything.

I am a pretty good judge of character. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that America is guilty of torture. There is enough evidence to point at torture. The harder thing will be to prove if the American administration had anything to do with it. Which is also obvious.We need to find some squeelers.
Either way it will ruin America's image.

Support is flailing and it was pretty much 50-50 to begin with.
The US administration is not america (despite what Bush would have you think) and more than Brussels is Europe.

I am aware of the distinction.

Well wait a second. Thats business, its a very different thing. While I disagree with some of it I'd point out that IReland among other nations fuels the industry by popularising it. Just because something immoral is produced in the US does not make it a solely US issue. Ireland an dthe Irish people are just as much to blame.

So its drug dealing and black markets. It doesnt make it right. American influence has spread way beyond its borders and its counter parts will do anything for a buck. Though we know the problem is the source and that is America.

Thats a fair enough point, but its up to others to oppose it. The UK in particular panders far to readily to the US policies.

Simply because their interests are one and they same. Imperialism and the spread of its Capitalism.

GuanYin

wiseones2cents wrote:

I am a pretty good judge of character.

I'm sorry, but thats irrelevant.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that America is guilty of torture. There is enough evidence to point at torture.

Care to point towards the mass of evidence. I've seen speculation and conjecture. No evidence as such.

The harder thing will be to prove if the American administration had anything to do with it. Which is also obvious.We need to find some squeelers.

Ok this is a second issue aside from your first accusation. Again, I wouldn't be at all surprised were this true. However, again you have no evidence to base this on.

I also find it alarming how many people feel that the best way to deal with a threat to justice is to pursue it without a justice system.

So what if you find "squeelers"? It doesn't mean that their testimony is the truth.

Should evidence come to light that could mount a case against the US on the grounds of torture, by all means, I'd like to see it go before an international court (what exactly you'd do to America in such an instance is beyond me, any attempt to chastise them would be taken very poorly by the US people, let alone the government).

That said, I doubt you will ever find enough evidence to prove anything, squeelers or no.

Either way it will ruin America's image.

Which image is this?

So its drug dealing and black markets. It doesnt make it right.

I've been exposed to drug dealers, criminals, alcoholics, thieves and prostitutes for much of my adult life. I've seen them both glamourised on screen and also in the harsh realities of personal encounters.

I've yet to succumb to any of the vices.

My point is, for the most part, we choose our own level of involvement in these things.

American influence has spread way beyond its borders and its counter parts will do anything for a buck. Though we know the problem is the source and that is America.

No, if you feel that american media here (and this applies for any country) is a detriment to the population, then the Irish government is at fault. The US are entitled to produce whatever media they like. If Ireland as a country is at risk, then Ireland as a country should ban US media (by media I mean films, rado, books etc). Its not up to the US to police other countries (Although believe me, I bet they'd like to).

If its really a problem we should black out the american media that we see as corrupting, just like the do in China and some of the Islamic middle eastern countries. They obviously agree with you about these issues and have taken action.

And don't we all look on in admiration and fair judgement of them as they make these censorship calls??

Simply because their interests are one and they same. Imperialism and the spread of its Capitalism.

Well then, shouldn't they be held accountable, their first priority is their people.

Eriugena

Sand wrote:

Well in the case where nasty spiky torture things were used, Abu Gharib, the soldiers involved were charged and convicted and the officer who was supposed to be running the show was demoted.

A PR excerciseno more. It also enabled the question of the "third party nationals" who were apparently directing things to be quietly forgotten.

And in the case of Gitmo, that hell on earth where detainees are supposed to be having their toenails ripped out - actually they do things like teach people how to read and do their prayer calls and so on and so forth.

And you know that how?

The worst Ive heard coming out of Gitmo is that when the most non-compliant are interogated that theyre insulted, belittled, humiliated and put under tremendous emotional strain.

And that is still torture by definition.

So theres a lot of claims about misdemeanors on the part of the "good" guys, that usually doesnt hold up to the light of day. It is however a mark that they are the good guys that such claims are investigated and punished as appropriate.

Whitewash and distraction.

Also, on your point about upholding freedom and locking people up for 4 years - actually the US can lock up people for as long as they want, technically until they die of old age without charge. If Al Queda is fighting a war against the US, which they claim, then any of their "soldiers" taken prisoner do not have to be released until the end of hostilities, which will never happen as Al Queda and Co will never sign a peace deal with the US. All perfectly above board too.

No they cannot. These people were unilaterally stripped of their Geneva rights, so legally they are abductees. Have you forgotten the offical US statements in this regard?

wiseones2cents

psi wrote:

Care to point towards the mass of evidence. I've seen speculation and conjecture. No evidence as such.

Here's some:http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10984.htm

Also if this was a murder case? They would have enough circumstancial evidence to convict him.
Americans refuse to participate in International criminal courts.
Americans refuse to pass anti-torture laws
Americans refuse access to Secret prisoners to the Red Cross.
Americans accused of kidnapping people in Italy.
Evidence of Americans detainees being shipped out.

Here is proof that the new government is just as bad as the old. Unless these were US Hired Mercenaries that are responsible. We know America has sent in quite a few hired mercenaries in Iraq.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051212/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

I also find it alarming how many people feel that the best way to deal with a threat to justice is to pursue it without a justice system.

So what if you find "squeelers"? It doesn't mean that their testimony is the truth.

It will be if they investigate it and find it to be truthful.

Should evidence come to light that could mount a case against the US on the grounds of torture, by all means, I'd like to see it go before an international court (what exactly you'd do to America in such an instance is beyond me, any attempt to chastise them would be taken very poorly by the US people, let alone the government).

Thats the problem. Not only that. They wont participate. Also Puppet leader george bush has finally threatened to Actually VETO something.He will veto any attempts to pass Anti-Torture laws.

That said, I doubt you will ever find enough evidence to prove anything, squeelers or no.

Maybe we have to torture suspects like the Americans do and force a confession out of them.;)

Which image is this?

America's image as the light of the nations. It is more like a dark cloud now.

I've been exposed to drug dealers, criminals, alcoholics, thieves and prostitutes for much of my adult life. I've seen them both glamourised on screen and also in the harsh realities of personal encounters.

I've yet to succumb to any of the vices.

My point is, for the most part, we choose our own level of involvement in these things.

I have also been exposed from my youth on up. Even though some do not succumb, MANY DO.

Also you are off topic. You were reffering to how Spreading Immorality is business and therefore ok. I pointed out Drug dealing and black markets are business also. Why are the not allowed?

No, if you feel that american media here (and this applies for any country) is a detriment to the population, then the Irish government is at fault. The US are entitled to produce whatever media they like. If Ireland as a country is at risk, then Ireland as a country should ban US media (by media I mean films, rado, books etc). Its not up to the US to police other countries (Although believe me, I bet they'd like to).

Do you really know the degree of Influence the Americans hold in Ireland?
I remember recently how a British politician complained that the countries entire influence was American and he was fed up with it.

If its really a problem we should black out the american media that we see as corrupting, just like the do in China and some of the Islamic middle eastern countries. They obviously agree with you about these issues and have taken action.

And how do you do that when they hold much Influence in our countries and give "donations" to our governors? Even though they thier own cheering squad(FOX). The Pentagon wants to launch another international Media.

And don't we all look on in admiration and fair judgement of them as they make these censorship calls??

I remember all kinds of censorship groups in the past. What happened to them? They recieved bribes to keep them quite? I dont hear them anymore.
Unless there is a major public outcry on an issue. I think the public is too busy
participating in immoral activity to complain about Immoral activity. That is the problem. Christian values are slowly disappearing.

Well then, shouldn't they be held accountable, their first priority is their people.

Of coarse they shopuld be held accountable. The problem is they pump out lots of mis-information and warped religious doctrine. The people actually think their priority is the people when in eventuality, It is theirselves.

GuanYin

wiseones2cents wrote:

Here's some:http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10984.htm

Also if this was a murder case? They would have enough circumstancial evidence to convict him.
Americans refuse to participate in International criminal courts.
Americans refuse to pass anti-torture laws
Americans refuse access to Secret prisoners to the Red Cross.
Americans accused of kidnapping people in Italy.
Evidence of Americans detainees being shipped out.

Ok, thats a second hand reported news story with the word "allegedly" in the title. Secondly, "circumstantial evidence" is rarely soley used to convict anyone.

If your not au fait on this, allegedly is an industry byword for "we have no proof but we'll print the story as an alleged occurance and can't be sued.

In other words, its not proof of anything.
Present the photos, medical reports, documents etc that the report claims exist and THAT is evidence.

Here is proof that the new government is just as bad as the old. Unless these were US Hired Mercenaries that are responsible. We know America has sent in quite a few hired mercenaries in Iraq.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051212/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

Ok, so this shows violence and abuse took lace, but the actual evidence presented no more shows that the US government was behind the abuse than any evidence in ferns suggests that the vatican told them to do it.

In both cases the governing body has condemned the action. That it happened is inexcusible and many hard questions will need to be asked. But no evidence prevented suggest it was premeditated from a higher authority.

That is pure conjecture at this point.

(as an aside I would not be surprised if the US gov did sanction torture, my argument is there is no proof).

It will be if they investigate it and find it to be truthful.

Thats a big if in both cases.

Maybe we have to torture suspects like the Americans do and force a confession out of them.;)

Although this is a joke, you have once again shown a bias, you have jumped to an accusation with no proof.

America's image as the light of the nations. It is more like a dark cloud now.

I would debate the idea that America was ever really a light of nations. At least to any rational person.

u are off topic. You were reffering to how Spreading Immorality is business and therefore ok. I pointed out Drug dealing and black markets are business also. Why are the not allowed?

Because the are deemed illegal under law.
There is no law (so far) governing degrees of immorality.

And it is very much on topic.

Do you really know the degree of Influence the Americans hold in Ireland?
I remember recently how a British politician complained that the countries entire influence was American and he was fed up with it.

YEs and britain is not Ireland. Look, its a very simple issue. IF you expose somebody to an idea and they act on the idea. They don't get automatic exoneration from their actions. If they act immorally, its their fault.

And how do you do that when they hold much Influence in our countries and give "donations" to our governors? Even though they thier own cheering squad(FOX). The Pentagon wants to launch another international Media.

Then you hold an Irish public enquiry/tribunal and deal with the corruption. YOu don't go blaming the source.

[quote[
I remember all kinds of censorship groups in the past. What happened to them? They recieved bribes to keep them quite? I dont hear them anymore.
Unless there is a major public outcry on an issue. I think the public is too busy
participating in immoral activity to complain about Immoral activity. That is the problem. Christian values are slowly disappearing.[/quote]That is again teh fault of the Irish people and the church, not the americans.

You can't blame chocolate makers because people are eating chocolate and becomming obese (although they do try). Its up to the people to look after themselves.

Of coarse they shopuld be held accountable. The problem is they pump out lots of mis-information and warped religious doctrine. The people actually think their priority is the people when in eventuality, It is theirselves.

Again, how is this the US's fault?

wiseones2cents

psi wrote:

Ok, thats a second hand reported news story with the word "allegedly" in the title. Secondly, "circumstantial evidence" is rarely soley used to convict anyone.

If your not au fait on this, allegedly is an industry byword for "we have no proof but we'll print the story as an alleged occurance and can't be sued.

In other words, its not proof of anything.
Present the photos, medical reports, documents etc that the report claims exist and THAT is evidence.


Ok, so this shows violence and abuse took lace, but the actual evidence presented no more shows that the US government was behind the abuse than any evidence in ferns suggests that the vatican told them to do it.

In both cases the governing body has condemned the action. That it happened is inexcusible and many hard questions will need to be asked. But no evidence prevented suggest it was premeditated from a higher authority.

That is pure conjecture at this point.

(as an aside I would not be surprised if the US gov did sanction torture, my argument is there is no proof).


Thats a big if in both cases.


Although this is a joke, you have once again shown a bias, you have jumped to an accusation with no proof.


I would debate the idea that America was ever really a light of nations. At least to any rational person.


Because the are deemed illegal under law.
There is no law (so far) governing degrees of immorality.

And it is very much on topic.



YEs and britain is not Ireland. Look, its a very simple issue. IF you expose somebody to an idea and they act on the idea. They don't get automatic exoneration from their actions. If they act immorally, its their fault.


Then you hold an Irish public enquiry/tribunal and deal with the corruption. YOu don't go blaming the source.

That is again teh fault of the Irish people and the church, not the americans.

You can't blame chocolate makers because people are eating chocolate and becomming obese (although they do try). Its up to the people to look after themselves.


Again, how is this the US's fault?

Lets keep this simple. Sometimes you do not need solid evidence to have a hunch. To me it is obvious. Though since we have no SOLID proof tying torture to the Adminstration YET. We will leave it at that.

My point is there SHOULD be laws against the promotion of Violence, drug use, gun play, threats,ect.....

Is it the fault of the transgressor or the tempter to transgress?This is where we see things differently.

You have a point though. Country(Irish) counter parts of American(OR FOREIGN) influence are also to blame. Regardless if America is the home base that sets up those counter parts.And the people.

It must be the Irish people to demand those coruptting influences be removed from their country.

Hobbes

wiseones2cents wrote:

Lets keep this simple. Sometimes you do not need solid evidence to have a hunch. To me it is obvious. Though since we have no SOLID proof tying torture to the Adminstration YET. We will leave it at that.

Ooh look we came full circle. You do know that the people in Gitmo are detained because of people who think exactly the way you do.

btw, don't quote copy someones whole article just to reply.

GuanYin

wiseones2cents wrote:

Lets keep this simple. Sometimes you do not need solid evidence to have a hunch. To me it is obvious. Though since we have no SOLID proof tying torture to the Adminstration YET. We will leave it at that.

See Hobbes' psot for my 100% agreement.

My point is there SHOULD be laws against the promotion of Violence, drug use, gun play, threats,ect.....

promotion or depiction?

Is it the fault of the transgressor or the tempter to transgress?This is where we see things differently.

What temptation are you specifically referring to?

You have a point though. Country(Irish) counter parts of American(OR FOREIGN) influence are also to blame. Regardless if America is the home base that sets up those counter parts.And the people.

So you believe that countries who have strong moral beliefs on a subject should intervene in the running and laws of another country who don't hold to those morals.

So you have no problem with the invasion of Iraq then?
Same difference there.

It must be the Irish people to demand those coruptting influences be removed from their country.

YEs, lets censor the Irish. No free will for anyone.

wiseones2cents

psi wrote:

See Hobbes' psot for my 100% agreement.

I'm not saying that Torture is not happening. Torture IS happening. And there IS evidence of this. Tying it to the American administration is where there is no Solid evidence. Though the soldiers in the scandel that claimed they were given orders from the pentagon to use torture tactics were silenced. DOnt worry. Evidence is coming.

promotion or depiction?

Both.

What temptation are you specifically referring to?

The temptation to sin. In America they are promoting sin as being cool. Therefore there are imitators and peer pressure influences to do these bad things.

So you believe that countries who have strong moral beliefs on a subject should intervene in the running and laws of another country who don't hold to those morals.

I did not say that. I said that Ireland's strong moral beliefs should intervene in STOPPING the promotion of another countries immoral influences in THIER Country.

So you have no problem with the invasion of Iraq then?
Same difference there.

If we stick to what I REALLY said. A country does not have authority to impose a system on another country. Thats pretty much Communism. That is what America has done. Though its not Imposing Communism but their coruptted form of Democracy.

YEs, lets censor the Irish. No free will for anyone.

Yes lets make murder, rape, stealing, assaulting legal(note sarcasm). That is how ridiculous your argument sounds. Free will yes but there must be laws to follow. Things that promote violence, confrontation, sinning should be Censored.

GuanYin

wiseones2cents wrote:

I'm not saying that Torture is not happening.

Nor am I.

Torture IS happening. And there IS evidence of this.

I'm sure you are right. Torture is happening somewhere in the world and being carried our by someone.

Tying it to the American administration is where there is no Solid evidence.

And this is where you fail.

You have no proof, bar your hunch that the US have sanctioned torture of prisoners.

Others, like myself are saying its possible, maybe even likely that this has happened. You on the other hand are saying it has definitely happened.

How can you know this? The answer is you can't.

Though the soldiers in the scandel that claimed they were given orders from the pentagon to use torture tactics were silenced. DOnt worry. Evidence is coming.

Oh how lame is that.

Yeah we have witnesses, but they're not allowed talk so we can't prove it.

For goodness sake. You can't have it both ways. Either your believe in an evidence based justice system or you don't.

The temptation to sin. In America they are promoting sin as being cool. Therefore there are imitators and peer pressure influences to do these bad things.

Whose definition of sin are you operating from? Different cultures, societies and religions have different yardsticks to work off.

Are you suggesting we work of your definition for the world?

I did not say that. I said that Ireland's strong moral beliefs should intervene in STOPPING the promotion of another countries immoral influences in THIER Country.

No you didn't. At least not initially. You said that the US should be stopped from producing immoral media (or something similar). I was the one who put forward the question as to whether it was Irelands own job to block it for our own people rather than policing other nations.

If we stick to what I REALLY said. A country does not have authority to impose a system on another country. Thats pretty much Communism. That is what America has done. Though its not Imposing Communism but their coruptted form of Democracy.

Go look at your initial posts. That is what you said.

Yes lets make murder, rape, stealing, assaulting legal(note sarcasm). That is how ridiculous your argument sounds. Free will yes but there must be laws to follow. Things that promote violence, confrontation, sinning should be Censored.

What have murder rape etc got to do with this?

Free will does not mean freedom to do these things. We already have laws in place for this.

What you're suggesting is thought police. The kind of thought policing that has lead to greater violations of human rights and incidences of torture than America could ever be held accountable for.

lili

psi wrote:

Ok, so this shows violence and abuse took lace, but the actual evidence presented no more shows that the US government was behind the abuse than any evidence in ferns suggests that the vatican told them to do it.

In both cases the governing body has condemned the action. That it happened is inexcusible and many hard questions will need to be asked. But no evidence prevented suggest it was premeditated from a higher authority.

i think that if such things happen, there is 2 possibilities :

- the administration is aware, then, americans should ask themselves what sort of "regim" is ruling their country.

- the administration isn't aware, then, americans should ask themselves if this administration is good enough.

GuanYin

lili wrote:

i think that if such things happen, there is 2 possibilities :

- the administration is aware, then, americans should ask themselves what sort of "regim" is ruling their country.

- the administration isn't aware, then, americans should ask themselves if this administration is good enough.

And I'd agree with that - although I do think that there is also the 3rd provision, it did happen, the US administration did know, but dealt with it internally and quietly, because they ACTUALLY DO BELIEVE (rightly or wrongly) that publicity will constitute a national security breach.

I mean they have said that they aren't commenting/participating because of security issues - it could just be they are being honest.

I'd be looking for the senate to get their act together and do the job they are elected to do. Find out whats going on and deal with the administration in whatever way the evidence that pans out dictates.

I mean, I sometimes wonder if people here understand how the US is actually run.

The senate, this past week, has no ruled out any question of torture being allowed as US policy and also blocked extension of many of the patriot act provisions.

Even the republican senators are becoming less and less enthusiastic about the Bush administration.

lili

i'm glad that patriot act has been blocked by the senat. finally, maybe republican senators less ultra, judged that bush administration went to far and all of those war on terror stuffs are prejudiciable to individual freedom.

wiseones2cents

psi wrote:

Nor am I.

Agreed

I'm sure you are right. Torture is happening somewhere in the world and being carried our by someone.

Agreed

And this is where you fail.

You have no proof, bar your hunch that the US have sanctioned torture of prisoners.

Others, like myself are saying its possible, maybe even likely that this has happened. You on the other hand are saying it has definitely happened.

How can you know this? The answer is you can't.

Its all too obvious, And I am usually not far from the truth. And Like I said, I cant prove it YET. Until then? We'll leave it at that.

Oh how lame is that.

Yeah we have witnesses, but they're not allowed talk so we can't prove it.

For goodness sake. You can't have it both ways. Either your believe in an evidence based justice system or you don't.

You haven't followed to many mob cases, have you.

Whose definition of sin are you operating from? Different cultures, societies and religions have different yardsticks to work off.

Though most have the same principles of law.

Are you suggesting we work of your definition for the world?

I'm suggesting In a Christian nation we work of the Bible's definition of law.

No you didn't. At least not initially. You said that the US should be stopped from producing immoral media (or something similar). I was the one who put forward the question as to whether it was Irelands own job to block it for our own people rather than policing other nations.

Did I not clearly correct myself?Are you backtracking where you shouldn't and evading the issue?

Go look at your initial posts. That is what you said.

No you go back and look at my post in regards to Iraq. Once again. Evading the question.

What have murder rape etc got to do with this?

Free will does not mean freedom to do these things. We already have laws in place for this.

What you're suggesting is thought police. The kind of thought policing that has lead to greater violations of human rights and incidences of torture than America could ever be held accountable for.

Murder and rape are sins and so is much of the stuff that is being promoted. They may be lesser sins but they LEAD to these serious ones.

Exactly, those laws are in the Bible and should be followed. Unless you Claim to be an Aethiest nation. I have been studying the world and the Elites have been working hard to eliminate religion from the world.

Thought police?lol I'm suggesting filtering out negative influences in our society. LOL. Torture? I wouldn't go to that extreme.

wiseones2cents

psi wrote:

And I'd agree with that - although I do think that there is also the 3rd provision, it did happen, the US administration did know, but dealt with it internally and quietly, because they ACTUALLY DO BELIEVE (rightly or wrongly) that publicity will constitute a national security breach.

I mean they have said that they aren't commenting/participating because of security issues - it could just be they are being honest.

And they weren't being honest when the Soldiers claimed they were just following orders?????

Also I hear they are made to feel unpatriotic(thats why many are brainwashed to not question the war) or risking American security if they tell the truth, some are more than likely bribed and some usually end up getting promoted after all is said and done. Thats how America operates.

GuanYin

wiseones2cents wrote:

Its all too obvious, And I am usually not far from the truth. And Like I said, I cant prove it YET. Until then? We'll leave it at that.

That all very nice in your world.

Out here in reality where none of us know you or how your brain works we need a little more than faith in your infallibility.

For some reason I'm reminded of a conversation between Fr. Ted and Dougal that involved a large piece of white card with a guide on it....

You haven't followed to many mob cases, have you.

Please provide concrete evidence incidents that give any credence to a comparison between the current US government and mob tactics.

Though most have the same principles of law.

Perhaps the definition of law, but otherwise no, I'll think you'll find you are very wrong there.

I'm suggesting In a Christian nation we work of the Bible's definition of law.

Which christian nation? Ireland? I see a democratic republic. I see nothing in the legal stature that defines our actions to that of a christian nation.

Did I not clearly correct myself?Are you backtracking where you shouldn't and evading the issue?

Obviously you didn't.

I'm not backtracking, I'm just pointing out how inconsistant you are.

No you go back and look at my post in regards to Iraq. Once again. Evading the question.

I don't need to. You changed your track when challenged and insisted thats what you were saying all along. Which is pretty silly considering its there in black text.

Murder and rape are sins and so is much of the stuff that is being promoted. They may be lesser sins but they LEAD to these serious ones.

Prove it.

Murder and rape existed long before the US existed, long before media, tv or any forms of promotion.

How do you reconsile that?

Exactly, those laws are in the Bible and should be followed. Unless you Claim to be an Aethiest nation. I have been studying the world and the Elites have been working hard to eliminate religion from the world.

Where do I subscribe to this study group. Do we get special names and tin foil hats when we join?

Thought police?lol I'm suggesting filtering out negative influences in our society. LOL. Torture? I wouldn't go to that extreme.

Youre suggesting its accomplished by dictating what people can and cannot think or see. So yes, thought police and yes as extreme as torture.

GuanYin

wiseones2cents wrote:

And they weren't being honest when the Soldiers claimed they were just following orders?????

Also I hear they are made to feel unpatriotic(thats why many are brainwashed to not question the war) or risking American security if they tell the truth, some are more than likely bribed and some usually end up getting promoted after all is said and done. Thats how America operates.

You hear from whom?

Is this your mate bill in the bar or do you actually have any source or evidence of your claims?

bonkey

wiseones2cents wrote:

Exactly, those laws are in the Bible and should be followed. Unless you Claim to be an Aethiest nation.

is it just me, or has w02c just indirectly stated that in his opinion there is no other religion which is a valid basis for morality and law, other than Christianity?

Funnily enough, in another thread, he advocated that Iraq be run by a religious triumverate (Kurd, Sunni, Shia). I'm wondering how he sees this as possible given that their choices would now apparently be limited to the basing their religious leadership on the teachings of the Bible, or an admission of Atheism.

supersheep

wiseones2cents wrote:

If we stick to what I REALLY said. A country does not have authority to impose a system on another country. Thats pretty much Communism. That is what America has done. Though its not Imposing Communism but their coruptted form of Democracy.

How the hell is that Communism? It's imperialism. Communism involves some form of workers' ownership, or ostensible ownership, and usually a planned economy and the like.
There is no evidence that torture is occurring, and it may well not be. But the chances of that are minuscule - why else would the US need to redefine 'torture'? If torture is only pain equivalent to massive organ failure or the like, then sure, the US isn't torturing people... That's probably the bst evidence - nothing more than circumstantial, though.

Capt'n Midnight

wiseones2cents wrote:

I'm suggesting In a Christian nation we work of the Bible's definition of law.

Exactly, those laws are in the Bible and should be followed. Unless you Claim to be an Aethiest nation. I have been studying the world and the Elites have been working hard to eliminate religion from the world.

Actually we had a vote on that back in '72 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
BTW: There are a LOT of laws in the Bible

wiseones2cents wrote:

50 cent is a bad role model for children. Bruce WIllis as far as I know hasn't made any unappropriate movies.

Just like to draw your attention to the way mainstream Hollywood usually suggests that the appropiate response to crime is execution by vigilante. Though oddly enough if the vigilante is a member of the law enforcement community then in many cases it's ok to just arrest the ringleader, but the execution of their minions in the course of the arrest is fine. most of the minions dispatched this way with due process of law aren't previously depicted as having commited any crimes apart from being bodyguards who are duty bound to intercept an armed assult by unknown persons. Also Hollywood usually depicts the justice system as being easily beaten by those arrested so the moral seems to be, become a crime lord and you will be back on the streets soon. Get an honest job as a bodyguard and you will die. This is the message being beamed to the public - problems are solved by loose cannons, due process doesn't work. Feed people enough of this and the edges blur, when violent acts are redefined in verbal usage or depiction then people become immune. Is Hollywood part of the problem or are the hawks in the US trying to use as cover ?

rsynnott

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Actually we had a vote on that back in '72 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
BTW: There are a LOT of laws in the Bible

Indeed. You'd better not be wearing any mixed fabric!

And we are not, fortunately, a Christian nation.

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Just like to draw your attention to the way mainstream Hollywood usually suggests that the appropiate response to crime is execution by vigilante.

OT, but am I the only one who has very serious issues with the use of the word 'execution' for murder?

Capt'n Midnight

rsynnott wrote:

OT, but am I the only one who has very serious issues with the use of the word 'execution' for murder?

Americans have so many different degrees of homicide that it gets confusing. And as a European based on the last century, execution to me usually means the killing of an inconvienent non-combatant, by a person employed by the government without full recourse to the legal process. Same as in the states really ( aren't words fun )

Unfortunately, it [the cloning machine] malfunctioned in such a way that it got halfway through creating each new Lintilla before the previous one was actually completed. Which meant, quite simply, that it was impossible ever to turn it off - without committing murder. This problem taxed the minds, first of the cloning engineers, then of the priests, then of the letters page of "The Sidereal Record Straigtener", and finally of the lawyers, who experimented vainly with ways of redefining murder, re-evaluating it, and in the end, even respelling it, in the hope that no one would notice.

--Douglas Adams, The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy

rsynnott

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

by a person employed by the government

That'd be the key phrase. Tho I'd be sceptical of calling illegal governmental killing 'execution'; a more correct term would surely be 'murder'.

Manic Moran

I believe a murder can become an execution once the victim had submitted and stopped fighting.

You then have your semantical differences between 'justified execution' such as the death penalty, and 'unjustified executions' which frequently are the related cause.

Originally Posted by wiseones2cents
Bruce WIllis as far as I know hasn't made any unappropriate movies.

Well, I don't think it's inappropriate, but you might given your objections to the US military in Iraq. He has announced he will make a movie about Deuce Four Infantry's year-long tour in Mosul. I hope he invites me to play myself, the tall dashing Irish tank officer :-)

NTM

rsynnott

Manic Moran wrote:

I believe a murder can become an execution once the victim had submitted and stopped fighting.

You then have your semantical differences between 'justified execution' such as the death penalty, and 'unjustified executions' which frequently are the related cause.

I'd question the justification of any execution, to be honest. And I'd discard out of hand that definition of 'execution'.

Manic Moran

And they weren't being honest when the Soldiers claimed they were just following orders?????

For the record, all American soldiers are taught that 'We were only following orders' is not a legitimate excuse.

And I'd discard out of hand that definition of 'execution'.

Well, I used it in the more emotinal sense. Such as person A sits down, submits to person B's control, and person B then shoves a shotgun to the back of A's head and shoots him. As opposed to the common view of murder, such as might happen in a struggle or altercation or show-down when the victim is not a effectually submissive participant in the proceedings.

I will grant that there may be an alternate definition which would take into account a pre-meditated targetting of an individual for death, such as the Mossad planting a bomb in a certain Palestinian's mobile 'phone. In that case, there was no submission at all.

In short, I believe that 'execution' is a more unique, special case, form of 'murder'

NTM

bonkey

Manic Moran wrote:

For the record, all American soldiers are taught that 'We were only following orders' is not a legitimate excuse.

Is it not also true, however, that the newly proposed "ban on torture" tahts been in the media a lot only mde it through once they coupled a rider to it which basically indemnifies US personnel from prosecution if they believed they were carrying out a legitimate order.

So, while its not quite the same, there would appear to be a way out with "we were only following what we believed to be legitimate orderers".

jc

Manic Moran

Well, I guess that would make sense.

In an autocratic organisation, you have to be fairly sure something is wrong before you'll say 'no' to an officer, for example.

NTM