All Hank, all the time.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Why do you feel the need to destroy our legal system simply because a bunch of radical Islamists terrorists would do things differently?



If I didn't find conservative hypocrisy so boring I might point it out here.

Live free or die?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Live free or die?

Good point.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
It's not an issue of justification for Israel - Hezbollah gave them ample rationale to take military action.

It's a question of the wisdom of their choice of action - they did themselves and the US absolutely no service with this one; they strengthened Hezbollah, weakened the Lebanese government, showed themselves to be vulnerable, and left us playing the role of toadies while France got to play a decisive role coming up with the cease fire at the UN. What happened to Israel? They make Rumsfeld look vaguely competent.

2

[SlaveNoMore]

by sebastian_dangerfield
I blame all of this on Sharon's reckless diet. This is why we have to win the war aginst Big Fat.

Kudos. I really wish I thought of this one

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Why do you feel the need to destroy our legal system simply because a bunch of radical Islamists terrorists would do things differently?

FYI - according to Powerline, early reports ("leaks"?) out of Great Britain are that some of the information that exposed the recent airline plot was obtained through "torture" - and that the arrests were prompted by an intercept of a frantic cellphone call to commence the plot.

Question - did these ends justify these means?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
FYI - according to Powerline, early reports ("leaks"?) out of Great Britain are that some of the information that exposed the recent airline plot was obtained through "torture" - and that the arrests were prompted by an intercept of a frantic cellphone call to commence the plot.

Question - did these ends justify these means?

The reports I saw said nothing about torture -- is it torture if it's in quotes? -- and said that the British wanted to let the plot develop more but that the US pushed for an early termination. If Pakistan is torturing ("torturing"?) people and shares information with us, we should use that info. If you intercept cell phone calls with a warrant -- and I understand that the Brits followed procedures requiring warrants -- then I have no problem with it.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
FYI - according to Powerline, early reports ("leaks"?) out of Great Britain are that some of the information that exposed the recent airline plot was obtained through "torture" - and that the arrests were prompted by an intercept of a frantic cellphone call to commence the plot.

Question - did these ends justify these means?

I am pro-rendition. btb.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
The reports I saw said nothing about torture -- is it torture if it's in quotes? -- and said that the British wanted to let the plot develop more but that the US pushed for an early termination. If Pakistan is torturing ("torturing"?) people and shares information with us, we should use that info. If you intercept cell phone calls with a warrant -- and I understand that the Brits followed procedures requiring warrants -- then I have no problem with it.

The quotes were mine, as some on this board would argue the "Comfy Chair" is torture.

What brought these guys down was the type of investigatory work that folks like Wonk want to prevent as treasonous.

[SlaveNoMore]

As if we need more evidence that even moderate Muslims refuse to assimilate into Western culture and wish to create a worldwide caliphate, we get this - the so-called "moderates" are blaming British common law for Muslim unrest and pushing for Sharia

Muslim leaders summoned to talks with the Government on tackling extremism in their midst called for public holidays to mark their religious festivals.

The Whitehall meeting was set up in response to last week's airline bomb plot discovery.

Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly had prepared an uncompromising message on the need to tackle dangerous radicalism.

But, in what she admitted were 'sharp' exchanges, some senior Muslim figures turned the tables yesterday and made a series of demands which also included the introduction of Sharia law for family matters.

Dr Syed Aziz Pasha, secretary general of the Union of Muslim Organisations of the UK and Ireland, said: 'We told her if you give us religious rights, we will be in a better position to convince young people that they are being treated equally along with other citizens.'

Dr Pasha said Miss Kelly had agreed to look at the proposals, though her spokesman insisted later that she did not favour any legal change which would give 'special treatment' for the Muslim community.

Some of the 30 moderate Muslim leaders at the meeting told Miss Kelly that important days in their two main religious festivals - Ramadan and Eid-ul-Adha - should be made public holidays for followers of the faith.

Sharia law, which is practised in large parts of the Middle East, should also be introduced in Britain, they argued. While it specifies stonings and amputations as routine punishments for crimes, Dr Pasha said he wanted it only for family affairs.

I guess stoning their wives to death will apparently allow them to take out all their anger against the West:

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
The quotes were mine, as some on this board would argue the "Comfy Chair" is torture.

What brought these guys down was the type of investigatory work that folks like Wonk want to prevent as treasonous.

I hope the current events point out to the electorate the importance of staying the course with the Rs (and Lieberman) in November. I think it is. I am hearing lots of good things from the field. On top of that McGavick is looking good in WA. That would be a big pickup and offset the loss of the traitor Chafee.

[Gattigap]

George Will has gone completely off the reservation -- now he's criticizing Bush, and actually has words of praise for Kerry.

WaPo

• The London plot against civil aviation confirmed a theme of an illuminating new book, Lawrence Wright's "The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11." The theme is that better law enforcement, which probably could have prevented Sept. 11, is central to combating terrorism. F-16s are not useful tools against terrorism that issues from places such as Hamburg (where Mohamed Atta lived before dying in the North Tower of the World Trade Center) and High Wycombe, England.
  
  Cooperation between Pakistani and British law enforcement (the British draw upon useful experience combating IRA terrorism) has validated John Kerry's belief (as paraphrased by the New York Times Magazine of Oct. 10, 2004) that "many of the interdiction tactics that cripple drug lords, including governments working jointly to share intelligence, patrol borders and force banks to identify suspicious customers, can also be some of the most useful tools in the war on terror." In a candidates' debate in South Carolina (Jan. 29, 2004), Kerry said that although the war on terror will be "occasionally military," it is "primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world."
  
  Immediately after the London plot was disrupted, a "senior administration official," insisting on anonymity for his or her splenetic words, denied the obvious, that Kerry had a point. The official told The Weekly Standard:
  
  "The idea that the jihadists would all be peaceful, warm, lovable, God-fearing people if it weren't for U.S. policies strikes me as not a valid idea. [Democrats] do not have the understanding or the commitment to take on these forces. It's like John Kerry. The law enforcement approach doesn't work."
  
  This farrago of caricature and non sequitur makes the administration seem eager to repel all but the delusional. But perhaps such rhetoric reflects the intellectual contortions required to sustain the illusion that the war in Iraq is central to the war on terrorism, and that the war, unlike "the law enforcement approach," does "work."
  
  The official is correct that it is wrong "to think that somehow we are responsible -- that the actions of the jihadists are justified by U.S. policies." But few outside the fog of paranoia that is the blogosphere think like that. It is more dismaying that someone at the center of government considers it clever to talk like that. It is the language of foreign policy -- and domestic politics -- unrealism.

Soon, I fear, we'll see Will's prone, lifeless carcass discovered in Farragut Square. Hank -- hold me.

Gattigap

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Gattigap
George Will has gone completely off the reservation -- now he's criticizing Bush, and actually has words of praise for Kerry.


Soon, I fear, we'll see Will's prone, lifeless carcass discovered in Farragut Square. Hank -- hold me.

Gattigap

I thought he was already dead.......maybe I was confusing irrelevance with death..........Is Reagan still president?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I'm calling asshole at this point and putting you in time out until you learn to behave.

Uh, I think that he's been in time out since at least 2002, and I wouldn't even want to guess when someone first called asshole on him.

[Adder]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
As if we need more evidence that even moderate Muslims refuse to assimilate into Western culture and wish to create a worldwide caliphate, we get this - the so-called "moderates" are blaming British common law for Muslim unrest and pushing for Sharia



I guess stoning their wives to death will apparently allow them to take out all their anger against the West:

If you can tell exactly what was reportedly asked for at that meeting, you are a far better psychic than me.

[SlaveNoMore]

Adder
If you can tell exactly what was reportedly asked for at that meeting, you are a far better psychic than me.

They asked that Sharia be applied in their family matters.

What the hell do you think that means?