Yeah, I know "plonk"
wrote in message
... On 11 Mar 2009 11:31:01 -0500, Dave wrote: On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:12:50 -0400, said: Not as complicated as that. Hornbook law. The 14th Amendment applies to States, not to the federal government. I give up. Which states are not part of the United States? Not sure whether I should recommend you read a basic civics book, or a grammar book. Which part of "federal government" do you not understand? I'm waiting for you to tell me which states are not covered by the 14th amendment. I can answer! Gitmo! Oh wait.... -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:05:12 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Those who believe that waterboarding is not torture should be submitted to it until they change their minds. When I make a word do a lot of work like that, I always pay it extra. (With apologies to Lewis Carroll) Very cute, but apropos of what I have no idea. Do you have a problem with irony? |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message ... I believe in the moral high ground of doing what is right over and above any conflicting laws. Stephen So we should be "A Nation of Laws," unless those laws get in our way. Gotcha. |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:59:10 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: "Dave" wrote in message . .. On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:05:12 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Those who believe that waterboarding is not torture should be submitted to it until they change their minds. When I make a word do a lot of work like that, I always pay it extra. (With apologies to Lewis Carroll) Very cute, but apropos of what I have no idea. More's the pity. But no doubt at least one or two people got the allusion. Ya, far be it from you to actually make a clear point. When you insist on inscrutability, you can claim to be far more intelligent than those who can't decypher your personal code. "Claim," of course, being the key word. |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
Dave wrote:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:11:20 -0400, Martin Baxter said: Unfortunately, you fall into the same trap as Doug. The issue is not whether the proper label has been attached to waterboarding. It's whether the use of that process is acceptable under some circumstances. Labels do not help in answering that question. Well, at least we've finally nailed down what it is that you're arguing about. Now, do you think it is, or isn't acceptable, in some situations? Torture that is. I assume that remark is made tongue in cheek. You assume incorrectly. I really would like to know your view. Cheers Martin |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
KLC Lewis wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:59:10 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: "Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:05:12 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Those who believe that waterboarding is not torture should be submitted to it until they change their minds. When I make a word do a lot of work like that, I always pay it extra. (With apologies to Lewis Carroll) Very cute, but apropos of what I have no idea. More's the pity. But no doubt at least one or two people got the allusion. Ya, far be it from you to actually make a clear point. When you insist on inscrutability, you can claim to be far more intelligent than those who can't decypher your personal code. "Claim," of course, being the key word. Well, when it comes to Dave's aphorisms, Alice in Wonderland provides a reasonable contextual background. Cheers Martin |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
"Marty" wrote in message ... Well, when it comes to Dave's aphorisms, Alice in Wonderland provides a reasonable contextual background. Cheers Martin He does seem the type who would play croquet with hedgehogs. |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:54:37 -0400, Marty said: Well, when it comes to Dave's aphorisms, Alice in Wonderland provides a reasonable contextual background. Close, but no cigar. It's from Through the Looking-glass. You should know, Mr. Dumpty. |
Yeah, I know "plonk"
Dave wrote:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:51:33 -0400, Marty said: Well, at least we've finally nailed down what it is that you're arguing about. Now, do you think it is, or isn't acceptable, in some situations? Torture that is. I assume that remark is made tongue in cheek. You assume incorrectly. I really would like to know your view. My view is that labeling something "torture" is not going to advance the discussion. What specific interrogation method or methods do you wish to discuss? Now you truly are being obtuse. I'm not labeling anything, the question is quite clear, I'll repeat it: "Well, at least we've finally nailed down what it is that you're arguing about. Now, do you think it is, or isn't acceptable, in some situations? Torture that is. " That is reasonable clear prose, I am not asking you to define what is or is not torture. Cheers Martin |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:05 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com