Re: The Great Don Quijote of RBM!



Ken the Troll wrote:
> Unfortunately we have a President who rides a bicycle, but its a
> mountain bike, which are ridden by people with a "macho" complex who
> are more interested in tearing up the environment than protecting it.
> He seems to prefer being hauled up to the top of a big hill and then
> coasts his way down, much as he seems to have done in college and in
> the university, and then calls that getting his exercise.
>
> If you want a better President next time you have to 1) contribute to
> those candidates that hold the same values as you do, 2) volunteer to
> work on their local campaign staff and then try to influence you
> neighbors, 3) vote in the primary or attend your caucus, 4) become a
> delegate to the national convention of your party [I hope the hell it
> isn't Republican - after 16 years of living under a Rethug government
> in Michigan], 5) continue to campaign and contribute to the candidate
> who is closest to your point of view, 6) vote early and then work with
> your candidate's committee to get out the vote. If you don't do this
> then don't complain about the people who get elected.
>
> I only vote for candidates who have a record of supporting cycling
> friendly bills and programs while they had office. We can ***** all we
> want of newsgroups like this, but unless we get active and elect
> people who support our causes we will continue to get "Bike Route"
> signs instead of designated bike lanes, paths, etc. and we will
> continue to see our brothers and sisters killed by "distracted" ( -
> "sun blinded" or what ever other excuse used to excuse the drivers who
> use their two to six ton gas pigs to kill us) drivers.
>
> As Pogo used to say "We have met the enemy and it is us!"
>
> Ken the Troll (living below - South - of the Mighty Mackinaw Bridge)
>


You missed your chance. John Kerry does ride a road bike. He rides it
well and on the roads. I know this first hand because he has ridden on
our weekly club rides many times. He rides the longer loop with the
faster riders. No fuss, no escorts, he just shows and rides, like any
other rider. I actually rode in a group with him without even knowing he
was in the group. Despite all the media BS, he seems very much like a
regular guy -- albeit a rather fit one.

I don't know his position on lanes & paths, I don't generally like them,
myself.
 
"Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> (not Tom) Keats wrote:
>> ...
>> And as far as sending republicans to Gutmo Bay is concerned (they must
>> have renamed it after Sicko's visit, lol), I've heard the medical care
>> there is just wonderful. Anyway the gentle souls of Gutmo Bay , in the
>> zenith of good health, are going to be loosed on the world quite soon.
>> You will no doubt be celebrating the occasion with your family and
>> friends, yes?

>
> Considering that most of the prisoners are there because someone turned
> them in for fictional "terrorist activities" to collect bounty money, yes.
>


Yes I know. *Most* imprisoned terrorists are turned in by their
brother-in-laws who never liked them to begin with or were forced on into
the field of battle by *others* just like *most* inmates in any prison are
*innocent* of all charges. What we are doing to them is just plain *mean*.
They've been humiliated enough.

We should free them all, don't you think?
 
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 07:07:05 -0500, "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Yes I know. *Most* imprisoned terrorists are turned in by their
>brother-in-laws who never liked them to begin with or were forced on into
>the field of battle by *others* just like *most* inmates in any prison are
>*innocent* of all charges. What we are doing to them is just plain *mean*.
>They've been humiliated enough.
>
>We should free them all, don't you think?


If they are guilty, then they need to be tried and convicted. I don't
have any problem with that. But, holding people indefinitely without
charging them is against everything this country was founded on.

If you don't know that, you should go back and review the
Constitution.
 
"still me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 07:07:05 -0500, "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>Yes I know. *Most* imprisoned terrorists are turned in by their
>>brother-in-laws who never liked them to begin with or were forced on into
>>the field of battle by *others* just like *most* inmates in any prison are
>>*innocent* of all charges. What we are doing to them is just plain
>>*mean*.
>>They've been humiliated enough.
>>
>>We should free them all, don't you think?

>
> If they are guilty, then they need to be tried and convicted. I don't
> have any problem with that. But, holding people indefinitely without
> charging them is against everything this country was founded on.
>


By far most of the Gutmo Bay (great name still me) enemy combatant detainees
have been released or sent back to their countries of origin. What's left
is about 200 of the worst of the worst.

Two hundred Moussaoui like farce trials would be a real hoot, but we hardly
have the time, money, or patience for it. So it seems to me the best
course would be to keep the detainee community together and resettle them in
the USA to start their new lives. We need to identify a nice liberal
community where the diversity the detainees bring to the community would be
celebrated by the residents. Where did you say you lived?

(not Tom) Keats
 
In article <[email protected]>,
still me <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 07:07:05 -0500, "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >Yes I know. *Most* imprisoned terrorists are turned in by their
> >brother-in-laws who never liked them to begin with or were forced on
> >into the field of battle by *others* just like *most* inmates in any
> >prison are *innocent* of all charges. What we are doing to them is
> >just plain *mean*. They've been humiliated enough.
> >
> >We should free them all, don't you think?

>
> If they are guilty, then they need to be tried and convicted. I don't
> have any problem with that. But, holding people indefinitely without
> charging them is against everything this country was founded on.
>
> If you don't know that, you should go back and review the
> Constitution.


And that is exactly the point. The Bush Administration has overturned
the principle of rule of law and is in violation of its oath to uphold
and defend the Constitution.
 
On Aug 6, 5:16 pm, "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > And how would you about getting rid of the Republicans? That would
> > leave us with something like, what 70% of the population by current
> > approval rates, right?

>
> Hmmmm.....How to go about getting rid of the republicans?
>
> Being the wimpy peace and lovenik that you are I'm sure you wouldn't have
> the personal courage for shooting them or herding them into gas chambers.
> But maybe you could convince your illegal alien kindred spirit brothers
> toiling away in the kitchens of America's restaurants to poison them. Or
> failing that you surely should be able to convince the 70% Good People to
> pass laws for mass republican sterilization. It would take longer than the
> gas chambers for sure, but you would have your final solution in good time.


I'd prefer a fate similar to that they subjected the Iraqi people
to...

Warning over spiralling Iraq refugee crisis

Thursday December 7, 2006
Guardian Unlimited

The surging violence in Iraq has created what is becoming the biggest
refugee crisis in the world, a humanitarian group said today.
A report (pdf) by Washington-based Refugees International said an
influx of Iraqis threatened to overwhelm other Middle Eastern
countries, particularly Syria, Jordon and Lebanon.

Last month, the UN estimated that 100,000 people were fleeing the
country each month, with the number of Iraqis now living in other Arab
countries standing at 1.8 million.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1966333,00.html

At that rate Iraq would lose all of its population within a few years.
But, of course, you can always hire Hindus, Pakistanis, Bangla Deshis
and some Chinese, elect an all-Iraqi Congress and declare
"democracy." ;)
 
"donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Last month, the UN estimated that 100,000 people were fleeing the
> country each month, with the number of Iraqis now living in other Arab
> countries standing at 1.8 million.
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1966333,00.html
>
> At that rate Iraq would lose all of its population within a few years.
> But, of course, you can always hire Hindus, Pakistanis, Bangla Deshis
> and some Chinese, elect an all-Iraqi Congress and declare
> "democracy." ;)
>


Yes, that's exactly what we should do.

Then we could live happily in peace and harmony ever after on the oil
revenues. This is the finest plan I've heard so far. Let's do it! Do you
want to tell President Bush or do you want me to tell him?

(not Tom) Keats
 
>>>> "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote: blah blah blah
>>> "still me" <[email protected]> wrote blah blah blah

> A Muzi wrote: blah blah blah


Bill Sornson wrote:
> Careful, Andrew, or Flogittodeathlinson and others will start assassinating
> your character and run you out of here like they did Mark.


Yes, I have opinions
No, I cannot always resist the urge to OT comment. Sorry.
My intent is not to force anyone away and
No, I'm not sensitive and I'm not leaving
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
 
>> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 07:07:05 -0500, "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes I know. *Most* imprisoned terrorists are turned in by their
>>> brother-in-laws who never liked them to begin with or were forced on
>>> into the field of battle by *others* just like *most* inmates in any
>>> prison are *innocent* of all charges. What we are doing to them is
>>> just plain *mean*. They've been humiliated enough.
>>>
>>> We should free them all, don't you think?


> still me <[email protected]> wrote:
>> If they are guilty, then they need to be tried and convicted. I don't
>> have any problem with that. But, holding people indefinitely without
>> charging them is against everything this country was founded on.
>> If you don't know that, you should go back and review the
>> Constitution.


Tim McNamara wrote:
> And that is exactly the point. The Bush Administration has overturned
> the principle of rule of law and is in violation of its oath to uphold
> and defend the Constitution.


No expert, but I keep a copy on my desk. Where's that section on
out-of-uniform enemy combatants overseas and their 'rights' under the
American Constitution again??

I did see the 'oath' part, "I will support and defend the Constitution
of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Sounds
good to me, glad he was sincere in it.

hint: Why does Geneva require uniforms, chain of command etc for
definition of POWs?

Maybe call pilots of airplanes-into-buildings 'freedom fighters'??
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
 
"A Muzi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> No expert, but I keep a copy on my desk. Where's that section on
> out-of-uniform enemy combatants overseas and their 'rights' under the
> American Constitution again??
>
> hint: Why does Geneva require uniforms, chain of command etc for
> definition of POWs?


Ok, so they aren't POWs. Which means they must be normal prisoners, and
should be treated as such - with the normal trial, etc. And this should be
done by somebody with juristiction in the area.

If they're not covered by the American Constitution, why are the Americans
holding them?

clive
 
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 23:44:45 +0100, "Clive George"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>If they're not covered by the American Constitution, why are the Americans
>holding them?
>
>clive


Therein lies the gotcha Clive. The Constitution allows for the defense
of the United States. Invading Afghanistan following 9-11 was clearly
allowed under that. As such, they are in fact enemy combatants, as
there is no other status for them to hold as non_US citizens arrested
on non-US soil without warrant.

FWIW, the constitution has no provision for the Iraqi invasion, but
that's another story.
 
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 08:25:43 -0500, "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote:

>By far most of the Gutmo Bay (great name still me) enemy combatant detainees
>have been released or sent back to their countries of origin. What's left
>is about 200 of the worst of the worst.


Then try the other 200. They've been ther long enough.
>
>Two hundred Moussaoui like farce trials would be a real hoot, but we hardly
>have the time, money, or patience for it.


Different circumstances, different trial. But, the fact remains. They
are entitled to due process. If their guilty, hang 'em, if not, send
them home.

>So it seems to me the best
>course would be to keep the detainee community together and resettle them in
>the USA to start their new lives. We need to identify a nice liberal
>community where the diversity the detainees bring to the community would be
>celebrated by the residents. Where did you say you lived?


Sorry my friend, but you've read me wrong. The fact that I don't like
the recent Republican party, and that I believe in a strong
Constitution and a stronger Bill of Rights, doesn't make me a liberal.
It makes me a conservative. But, you're too neo-con to know that.
Unless you want to brand the Founding Fathers as liberals. Then I will
proudly stand beside them.
 
"still me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 08:25:43 -0500, "Keats" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>By far most of the Gutmo Bay (great name still me) enemy combatant
>>detainees
>>have been released or sent back to their countries of origin. What's left
>>is about 200 of the worst of the worst.

>
> Then try the other 200. They've been ther long enough.
>>
>>Two hundred Moussaoui like farce trials would be a real hoot, but we
>>hardly
>>have the time, money, or patience for it.

>
> Different circumstances, different trial. But, the fact remains. They
> are entitled to due process. If their guilty, hang 'em, if not, send
> them home.



If anything, each of the 200 unlawful enemy combatant trials would be more
difficult than Moussaoui's trail, which, by the way, took over four years to
get started with a cost of tens of millions dollars. How do the unlawful
enemy combatants get due process in our domestic courts when they were
caputured on foreign soil, weren't read their rights, or properly arrested,
or served with search or arrest warrents, and aren't citizens. Your idea to
try them, hang them if guilty, or send them home if not quilty seems naive.

The legal status of unlawful enemy combatants and their treatment needs to
be resolved so that everyone will have a clear understanding in as much as
were are going to be dealing with Islamic jihad for years to come. Let's
set the ground rules and stop the whining.

>
>>So it seems to me the best
>>course would be to keep the detainee community together and resettle them
>>in
>>the USA to start their new lives. We need to identify a nice liberal
>>community where the diversity the detainees bring to the community would
>>be
>>celebrated by the residents. Where did you say you lived?

>


I take it you didn't really go for my suggestion to resettle these unlawful
enemy jihadists in your community.


> Sorry my friend, but you've read me wrong. The fact that I don't like
> the recent Republican party, and that I believe in a strong
> Constitution and a stronger Bill of Rights, doesn't make me a liberal.
> It makes me a conservative. But, you're too neo-con to know that.
> Unless you want to brand the Founding Fathers as liberals. Then I will
> proudly stand beside them.
>
>


I trust the founding fathers would have some ideas about the differences
between domestic criminals and non-citizens who are unlawful Islamic enemy
jihad combatants captured on foreign soil.

(not Tom) Keats
 
> "A Muzi" <[email protected]> wrote
>> No expert, but I keep a copy on my desk. Where's that section on
>> out-of-uniform enemy combatants overseas and their 'rights' under the
>> American Constitution again??
>> hint: Why does Geneva require uniforms, chain of command etc for
>> definition of POWs?


Clive George wrote:
> Ok, so they aren't POWs. Which means they must be normal prisoners, and
> should be treated as such - with the normal trial, etc. And this should
> be done by somebody with juristiction in the area.
>
> If they're not covered by the American Constitution, why are the
> Americans holding them?


Some might say it's an ad hoc and still-evolving solution to vicious and
feral attacks based on an asymmetry which exploits the freedoms of an
advanced civilization against itself. Not citizens. Not soldiers. No
clear prior examples to follow.

Others feel the power, wealth and blood of the nation are being spent to
unfairly exploit a couple hundred innocent 'just walking by' victims at
Guantanamo.

I'm reminded of Norman Mailer, who 'discovered' a violent felon with
supposed writing skills. After Mailer got him out from under the jury's
sentence, the 'poor soul' sliced a waiter to death with a knife in NYC.
I think the taxpaying waiter's rights were abridged but, hey, people's
viewpoints differ.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
 
"A Muzi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> "A Muzi" <[email protected]> wrote
>>> No expert, but I keep a copy on my desk. Where's that section on
>>> out-of-uniform enemy combatants overseas and their 'rights' under the
>>> American Constitution again??
>>> hint: Why does Geneva require uniforms, chain of command etc for
>>> definition of POWs?

>
> Clive George wrote:
>> Ok, so they aren't POWs. Which means they must be normal prisoners, and
>> should be treated as such - with the normal trial, etc. And this should
>> be done by somebody with juristiction in the area.
>>
>> If they're not covered by the American Constitution, why are the
>> Americans holding them?

>
> Some might say it's an ad hoc and still-evolving solution to vicious and
> feral attacks based on an asymmetry which exploits the freedoms of an
> advanced civilization against itself. Not citizens. Not soldiers. No clear
> prior examples to follow.


No clear example being set either - no shining beacon for people to be proud
of and for the world to follow. Sure, it's only a couple of hundred people.
But it's a couple of hundred examples for the folk who are going to see the
US as an evil country, and who do rather more than write tetchy emails about
it.

> I'm reminded of Norman Mailer, who 'discovered' a violent felon with
> supposed writing skills. After Mailer got him out from under the jury's
> sentence, the 'poor soul' sliced a waiter to death with a knife in NYC. I
> think the taxpaying waiter's rights were abridged but, hey, people's
> viewpoints differ.


"Courts release felon shock". It's not exactly an isolated case, is it?
People reoffend when they get out of prison, people get let off on
technicalities, people don't get charged in the first case. (Income tax
evasion the best they could come up with for a certain famous person?)

There is one important difference : said violent felon didn't have many more
people being inspired to attack the US because of his treatment.

And I'm prepared to put up with the problems that arise from eg assumption
of innocence, trial by jury, due process, as the alternatives are far
worse - police state, etc.

(Did you know that your fine country won't give people a visa waiver if
they've ever been arrested? Not charged, not found guilty, but arrested -
which can legitimately happen on the uncorroborated word of one person.)

clive
 
On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 22:22:55 -0500, A Muzi <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Some might say it's an ad hoc and still-evolving solution to vicious and
>feral attacks based on an asymmetry which exploits the freedoms of an
>advanced civilization against itself. Not citizens. Not soldiers. No
>clear prior examples to follow.


Evolving is too strong a phrase. If it was evolving, there wouldn't be
a problem. It's not a process that's moving.

Fact is, there are tens of millions of fundamentalists with the same
mindset, all out running free.

If there is specific evidence that these remaining prisoners are
something more, put them on trial. Prove something, dispose of
properly. It worked at Nuremberg, it can work here. If there's no
evidence then, despite our suspicions, we have no rights to hold them.
It's really pretty simple.
 
It's my contention here that a very modern trend is rooted in a very
primitive behavior: MONKEY SEE MONKEY DO. Yeap, those who got money
and power (the top monkeys) ride big shiny SUVs, so the rest of the
troop quickly learns the trick. IF YOU WANT TO STAND OUT AND SURVIVE
IN THE JUNGLE YOU BETTER HAVE AN SUV. The hope, however, is that we
can turn around that bad behavior by changing those monkeys at the top
--or simply changing their behavior-- so the other monkeys would
follow...


(THE HUNDREDTH MONKEY BY KEN KEYES, JR.)

This book does not deal with petty matters.

It tells how to operate our lives - and our world.

It tells us how to stay alive!

The mess we've brought upon ourselves is a most perilous and
challenging one.

The broad picture pieced together here will show you the immensity of
the nuclear dangers, the futility of any defense or protection, the
power of the new awareness and your role in the unfolding drama.

There is a phenomenon I'd like to tell you about.

In it may lie our only hope of a future for our species.

Here is the story of the Hundredth Monkey:

The Japanese monkey, Macaca fuscata, has been observed in the wild for
a period of over 30 years.

In 1952, on the island of Koshima scientists were providing monkeys
with sweet potatoes dropped in the sand. The monkeys liked the taste
of the raw sweet potatoes, but they found the dirt unpleasant.

An 18-month-old female named Imo found she could solve the problem in
a nearby stream. She taught this trick to her mother. Her playmates
also learned this new way and they taught their mothers, too.

This cultural innovation was gradually picked up by various monkeys
before the eyes of the scientists.

Between 1952 and 1958, all the young monkeys learned to wash the sandy
sweet potatoes to make them more palatable.

Only the adults who imitated their children learned this social
improvement. Other adults kept eating the dirty sweet potatoes.

Then something startling took place. In the autumn of 1958, a certain
number of Koshima monkeys were washing sweet potatoes - the exact
number is not known.

Let us suppose that when the sun rose one morning there were 99
monkeys on Koshima Island who had learned to wash their sweet
potatoes.

Let's further suppose that later that morning, the hundredth monkey
learned to wash potatoes.

THEN IT HAPPENED!

By that evening almost everyone in the tribe was washing sweet
potatoes before eating them.

The added energy of this hundredth monkey somehow created an
ideological breakthrough!

But notice.

A most surprising thing observed by these scientists was that the
habit of washing sweet potatoes then jumped over the sea -

Colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys
at Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes!*

(*Lifetide by Lyall Watson, pp. 147-148. Bantam Books 1980. This book
gives other fascinating details.)

Thus, when a certain critical number achieves an awareness, this new
awareness may be communicated from mind to mind.

Although the exact number may very, the Hundredth Monkey Phenomenon
means that when only a limited number of people know of a new way, it
may remain the consciousness property of these people.

But there is a point at which if only one more person tunes-in to a
new awareness, a field is strengthened so that this awareness is
picked up by almost everyone!

Your awareness is needed in saving the world from nuclear war.

You may be the "Hundredth Monkey" . . . .

http://secretthink.blog-city.com/from_a_100_monkeys_can_we_learn_their_lesson.htm
 
Response to donquijote1954:
> A most surprising thing observed by these scientists was that the
> habit of washing sweet potatoes then jumped over the sea -
>
> Colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys
> at Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes!*
>
> (*Lifetide by Lyall Watson, pp. 147-148. Bantam Books 1980. This book
> gives other fascinating details.)



Erm, but it's a myth: Lyall Watson made it up.

Google for it, if you can be bothered.


--
Mark, UK
"Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open
sewer and die."
 
"Mark McNeill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Response to donquijote1954:
>> A most surprising thing observed by these scientists was that the
>> habit of washing sweet potatoes then jumped over the sea -
>>
>> Colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys
>> at Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes!*
>>
>> (*Lifetide by Lyall Watson, pp. 147-148. Bantam Books 1980. This book
>> gives other fascinating details.)

>
>
> Erm, but it's a myth: Lyall Watson made it up.
>
> Google for it, if you can be bothered.
>
>
> --


Whew! That's a relief. I was getting all concerned about Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad being the 100th ******.

(not Tom) Keats
 
On Aug 5, 1:03 pm, Ken the Troll <[email protected]> wrote:
> Unfortunately we have a President who rides a bicycle, but its a
> mountain bike, which are ridden by people with a "macho" complex who
> are more interested in tearing up the environment than protecting it.
> He seems to prefer being hauled up to the top of a big hill and then
> coasts his way down, much as he seems to have done in college and in
> the university, and then calls that getting his exercise.
>
> If you want a better President next time you have to 1) contribute to
> those candidates that hold the same values as you do, 2) volunteer to
> work on their local campaign staff and then try to influence you
> neighbors, 3) vote in the primary or attend your caucus, 4) become a
> delegate to the national convention of your party [I hope the hell it
> isn't Republican - after 16 years of living under a Rethug government
> in Michigan], 5) continue to campaign and contribute to the candidate
> who is closest to your point of view, 6) vote early and then work with
> your candidate's committee to get out the vote. If you don't do this
> then don't complain about the people who get elected.
>
> I only vote for candidates who have a record of supporting cycling
> friendly bills and programs while they had office. We can ***** all we
> want of newsgroups like this, but unless we get active and elect
> people who support our causes we will continue to get "Bike Route"
> signs instead of designated bike lanes, paths, etc. and we will
> continue to see our brothers and sisters killed by "distracted" ( -
> "sun blinded" or what ever other excuse used to excuse the drivers who
> use their two to six ton gas pigs to kill us) drivers.
>
> As Pogo used to say "We have met the enemy and it is us!"
>
> Ken the Troll (living below - South - of the Mighty Mackinaw Bridge)


If the president's riding skills are the same as his speaking skills,
I certainly don't want to ride near him.