Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#201
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
Dave wrote:
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. Missed my meaning? Cheers Martin |
#202
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
On 11 Mar 2009 18:35:02 -0500, Dave wrote:
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. Clopse but no cigar. You are looking in a fun house mirror. |
#203
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
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? The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution is one of the post-Civil War Reconstruction Amendments that was first intended to secure the rights of former slaves. It was proposed on June 13, 1866 and ratified on July 9, 1868. The amendment provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) which had excluded slaves and their descendants from possessing Constitutional rights. The amendment requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions .... Cheers, Bruce (bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom) |
#204
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
Dave wrote:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:17:47 -0400, Marty said: Now, do you think it is, or isn't acceptable, in some situations? Torture that is. When did you stop beating your mother? I rather think that you regard circumlocution as one of your strong points. If you are going to refuse to answer simple questions, then having a meaningful discussion becomes impossible. Cheers Martin ------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------ For a quality usenet news server, try DNEWS, easy to install, fast, efficient and reliable. For home servers or carrier class installations with millions of users it will allow you to grow! ---- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dnews.htm ---- |
#205
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
Dave wrote:
Calling waterboarding "torture" is definitely not an adequate substitute for reasoned discussion. OK, solet me make sure I've got your point straight... Forcefully holding a person's head under water until they believe they are going to die... and in some cases, actually die... does not fall within the definition of "torture." Is that it? Now, what about other things, like giving prisoners electric shocks, having them attacked by killer dogs, or using "pressure positions" (a widely used one is to hang them from their arms, remarkably like Roman crucifixion)... again, many times "interrogators" using these methods have killed prisoners in US custody... documented by the US military who had custody of the prisoners but did not carry out the interrogations. It's simply trying to attach a label in the hope that substantive discussion will be foreclosed. Why do you find this concept so hard to grasp? Saying that I don'tgrasp your concept is a simple way to divert attention with a little insult.... while totally failing to answer any of the points I have made about the serious flaws in your logic... not to mention your moral position. Just to make it clear, you are in favor of inflicting pain, fear, and bodily harm, on US prisoners... to the point of death in many cases... for the sake of almost-certanly-useless information. To you, the slight possibility of gaining useful info is worth BOTH the risk of losing any chance of gaining further info from that prisoner, and sacrificing the moral position of the whole country. That's it in a nutshel, right? DSK |
#206
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
Stephen Trapani wrote:
Then why don't we take reasonable measures to find out what we need to find out to stop these mass murderers! Sure... I got nothing against that. ..... The moral high ground includes and excludes many things, but one thing it includes is putting the well being of innocents ahead of the rights of mass murderers! Does this have anything to do with the issue at hand (tortureof prisoners)? The main point that you (and Dave, and other pro-torture people) have failed to make is that using torture actually accomplishes anything at all to prevent terrorists. Instead, you blame -us- for failing to use torture.... sorry, but terrorism is not my fault. You can take responsibility yourself if you like. But you can't just change the laws of our nation to suit your own moral perceptions (just like I can't). Furthermore, a group of people who -were- in a position to change the laws of our nation (or, more accurately, temporarily change a few and ignore a lot of others) agree with your moral perceptions.... specifically, that torturing prisoners is OK... and they don't really seem to have gotten such great results. DSK |
#207
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:10:45 -0400, Martin Baxter said: Now, do you think it is, or isn't acceptable, in some situations? Torture that is. When did you stop beating your mother? I rather think that you regard circumlocution as one of your strong points. If you are going to refuse to answer simple questions, then having a meaningful discussion becomes impossible. So you won't tell me when you stopped beating her? Still waiting for an answer to a simple question...... Do try and display a modicum of intellegence and refrain from reposting another puerile response. Cheers Martin |
#208
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
"Marty" wrote in message
... Dave wrote: On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:10:45 -0400, Martin Baxter said: Now, do you think it is, or isn't acceptable, in some situations? Torture that is. When did you stop beating your mother? I rather think that you regard circumlocution as one of your strong points. If you are going to refuse to answer simple questions, then having a meaningful discussion becomes impossible. So you won't tell me when you stopped beating her? Still waiting for an answer to a simple question...... Do try and display a modicum of intellegence and refrain from reposting another puerile response. Cheers Martin You sure are asking a lot! Sheesh.. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#210
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I know "plonk"
"Marty" wrote in message ... Dave wrote: On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:56:52 -0700 (PDT), said: OK, solet me make sure I've got your point straight... Forcefully holding a person's head under water until they believe they are going to die... and in some cases, actually die... does not fall within the definition of "torture." Is that it? Sigh...you still don't get it. I'm not saying it is or is not properly labeled "torture." I'm saying the label you stick on it is no more than an expression of your conclusion that it's a "bad thing." Expressing that conclusion isn't going to persuade any rational person that your conclusion is correct. Only that you believe it. Ok, since you insist on this exercise in sophistry, let's return to first principles and move to a more Socratic level. Please define what the term "torture" means. I will keep this to one question at a time to avoid confusing anyone. Cheers Martin It means whatever we want it to, silly. If we want it to mean birthday cake and puppies and merry-go-rounds, it doesn't have to mean just "bad things" after all. It's just a word, after all. I think Dave needs to brush-up on his S.I. Hayakawa. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Way OT, but a "cold war" question. who were the "Pinkos?" | General | |||
"Jeffrey Boyd" is an anagram of "Midget Runt" in Japanese | ASA | |||
Battery with "Double the Power" or that takes up "Half the Space" | ASA | |||
Marinco 15 Amp "Marine Grade" 120VAC Receptical v. Leviton "terrestrial grade" | Boat Building |