Where did the "dirty bomb" go?

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

BTW, have you found a suitable replacement for DU? One that performs as well or better but without the health problems? Thought not.

Why is the burden on ME to find a replacement. Have YOU found a replacement for mustard gas, which has, quite appropriately, been banned?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

BTW, have you found a suitable replacement for DU? One that performs as well or better but without the health problems? Thought not.

Why is the burden on ME to find a replacement. Have YOU found a replacement for mustard gas, which has, quite appropriately, been banned?

Because you are one of the folks bitching about it being used, that's why.

[willard 0]

Enemy combatant is just another term for prisoner of war. Jeez, even I could figure that one out.
POWs can be held without charges as long as the conflict is ongoing.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Enemy combatant is just another term for prisoner of war. Jeez, even I could figure that one out.
POWs can be held without charges as long as the conflict is ongoing.

Actually, I thought the term "enemy combatant" had been created to differentiate the status from POW, for which the Geneva Convention's rules would apply.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Quote

BTW, have you found a suitable replacement for DU? One that performs as well or better but without the health problems? Thought not.

Why is the burden on ME to find a replacement. Have YOU found a replacement for mustard gas, which has, quite appropriately, been banned?

Because you are one of the folks bitching about it being used, that's why.

I would have bitched about mustard gas too. I guess mustard gas is fine with you.

I think DU should be banned, just like mustard gas.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Enemy combatant is just another term for prisoner of war. Jeez, even I could figure that one out.
POWs can be held without charges as long as the conflict is ongoing.

Actually, I thought the term "enemy combatant" had been created to differentiate the status from POW, for which the Geneva Convention's rules would apply.

You are correct. POWs have rights that Bush denied to the so-called "enemy combatants".

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Enemy combatant is just another term for prisoner of war. Jeez, even I could figure that one out.
POWs can be held without charges as long as the conflict is ongoing.

You haven't explained away the fact that he is a citizen of our country - he is supposed to enjoy the protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

If reclassing citizens as not to get around these rights doesn't phase you, might be worth looking at Colonial history to see how the Royals behaved in the 1760s and 70s.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

BTW, have you found a suitable replacement for DU? One that performs as well or better but without the health problems? Thought not.

Why is the burden on ME to find a replacement. Have YOU found a replacement for mustard gas, which has, quite appropriately, been banned?

Because you are one of the folks bitching about it being used, that's why.

I would have bitched about mustard gas too. I guess mustard gas is fine with you.

I think DU should be banned, just like mustard gas.

Last I checked the US wasn't using mustard gas in Iraq.
Stay on topic...focus.

[willard 0]

You mean like John Hinckley? More than a quarter century ago tried to murder the President and has been denied freedom by the secret service long after he would have been let go if his intended victim had been anyone else.

Did you ever consider that the reason there has been no terrorist attacks on US homeland since 9/11 just may be because people who have been found plotting to build dirty bombs have been held in custody as a prisoner of war, or, as called today, an enemy combatant?

Call me what you will, I feel no sorrow for the guy and am glad he has been kept off the streets. If it had been my choice I would have done the same thing. The same people who whine and cry "They violated his rights!" when people like him are held are the same ones who whine and cry "They blew up my office buliding!" when asshats are left to their ways.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Did you ever consider that the reason there has been no terrorist attacks on US homeland since 9/11 just may be because people who have been found plotting to build dirty bombs have been held in custody as a prisoner of war, or, as called today, an enemy combatant?

They have NOT been held as prisoners of war, but as "enemy combatant", which is very different.
I respect your right to agree with such process, but regardless of its value, I find it greatly at odds with the principles on which the United States of America were founded.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

Enemy combatant is just another term for prisoner of war. Jeez, even I could figure that one out.
POWs can be held without charges as long as the conflict is ongoing.

You are completely, utterly wrong.

The term "enemy combatant" was specifically created to bypass both the Geneva convention and the US constitution.

Enemy combatants are NOT POWs. You figured wrong.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

You mean like John Hinckley? More than a quarter century ago tried to murder the President and has been denied freedom by the secret service long after he would have been let go if his intended victim had been anyone else.

Hinckley committed an actual crime, and was found mentally incompetent to stand trial. How do you compare that with this, where there was none and where the alledged super crimes all vanished?

Quote

Did you ever consider that the reason there has been no terrorist attacks on US homeland since 9/11 just may be because people who have been found plotting to build dirty bombs have been held in custody as a prisoner of war, or, as called today, an enemy combatant?

Actually, the reason we've seen no attacks is because I wear a necklace with a shark's tooth and a closing pin.

Can you prove otherwise?

Quote

Call me what you will, I feel no sorrow for the guy and am glad he has been kept off the streets.

I'm sure, at least so long as you aren't that guy.

[jakee 1,594]

By the way, you never answered my question. If you were arrested, designated an enemy combatant and held for several years without charges or access to legal council, would you accept it as part and parcel of the proper workings of your legal system?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Enemy combatant is just another term for prisoner of war. Jeez, even I could figure that one out.
POWs can be held without charges as long as the conflict is ongoing.

You are completely, utterly wrong.

The term "enemy combatant" was specifically created to bypass both the Geneva convention and the US constitution.

Enemy combatants are NOT POWs. You figured wrong.

No, YOU'RE wrong. Unless, of course, you can provide hard evidence (opinions don't count) of the claim that the term was specifically created to bypass the GC and the U.S. Constitution. If you can I will gladly admitt I was wrong.

[willard 0]

Quote

By the way, you never answered my question. If you were arrested, designated an enemy combatant and held for several years without charges or access to legal council, would you accept it as part and parcel of the proper workings of your legal system?

I'll worry about that when I'm dealing with known terrorists and plotting to kill dozens or hundreds of people at once.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

You mean like John Hinckley? More than a quarter century ago tried to murder the President and has been denied freedom by the secret service long after he would have been let go if his intended victim had been anyone else.

Hinckley committed an actual crime, and was found mentally incompetent to stand trial. How do you compare that with this, where there was none and where the alledged super crimes all vanished?

Quote

Did you ever consider that the reason there has been no terrorist attacks on US homeland since 9/11 just may be because people who have been found plotting to build dirty bombs have been held in custody as a prisoner of war, or, as called today, an enemy combatant?

Actually, the reason we've seen no attacks is because I wear a necklace with a shark's tooth and a closing pin.

Can you prove otherwise?

Quote

Call me what you will, I feel no sorrow for the guy and am glad he has been kept off the streets.

I'm sure, at least so long as you aren't that guy.

There is hard evidence against Padilla, ignore it if you want. Hinckley was never convicted of a crime....you seem to have forgotten that. Some doctors have testified that he is fit to rejoin society. The US government disagrees.
Yeah, it's just a freaky coincidence that when the government started playing hardball with terrorists here all the attacks stopped. That must have been when you started wearing your majic shark tooth.

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

Quote

By the way, you never answered my question. If you were arrested, designated an enemy combatant and held for several years without charges or access to legal council, would you accept it as part and parcel of the proper workings of your legal system?

I'll worry about that when I'm dealing with known terrorists and plotting to kill dozens or hundreds of people at once.

How incredibly naive to think that law enforcement never makes mistakes.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

No, YOU'RE wrong. Unless, of course, you can provide hard evidence (opinions don't count) of the claim that the term was specifically created to bypass the GC and the U.S. Constitution. If you can I will gladly admitt I was wrong.

Are Enemy Combatants afforded the protection of the Geneva convention?
Are Enemy Combatants afforded the protection of the US constitution?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

By the way, you never answered my question. If you were arrested, designated an enemy combatant and held for several years without charges or access to legal council, would you accept it as part and parcel of the proper workings of your legal system?

I'll worry about that when I'm dealing with known terrorists and plotting to kill dozens or hundreds of people at once.

How incredibly naive to think that law enforcement never makes mistakes.

Where did I say that? Please, Dear Sir, point out where I made that statement so that I may correct it.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

No, YOU'RE wrong. Unless, of course, you can provide hard evidence (opinions don't count) of the claim that the term was specifically created to bypass the GC and the U.S. Constitution. If you can I will gladly admitt I was wrong.

Are Enemy Combatants afforded the protection of the Geneva convention?
Are Enemy Combatants afforded the protection of the US constitution?

Eh eh eh! Quit dodging! Show me the evidence of your claim.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

I'll worry about that when I'm dealing with known terrorists and plotting to kill dozens or hundreds of people at once.

Unfortunately, things are not always that clear cut, and that is where individuals rely on the constitution and laws.
As an anecdote: a friend of mine was, for a week, the national suspect #1 in the Anthrax events of late 2001. Why? Because:
1/ he ordered large quantities of Cipro from overseas (his daughter is diabetic, and since the Anthrax scare created a shortage in Cipro stocks, he had his father in law, who is a doctor, ship some to him form Europe)
2/ he owns breweries
3/ after September 11, he traveled (on business) to Florida and NYC
4/ his birthday is... 9/11
The FBI visited him several times, and finally ruled him out as prime suspect after checking facts.
These events occured prior to the notion of "enemy combatant" appearing in our vocabulary. Whether or not he would have been taken in as a suspected terrorist will never be known. But it is in these types of cases that due process is the difference between an innocent man being incarcerated and this same man laughing about the ordeal with friends...

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

Where did I say that? Please, Dear Sir, point out where I made that statement so that I may correct it.

It is a fact of life that innocent people will fall under suspicion of grevious crimes and get arrested. It is a fact of life that the cases against these people will be so strong (innocent though they may be) that they go to trial where the case can be heard by a jury. Those arresting the enemy combatants will make mistakes also.

For you to think that no-one will ever be arrested and detained for several years without access to legal council unless they were actually doing something wrong is incredibly naive.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

Eh eh eh! Quit dodging! Show me the evidence of your claim.

Not a dodge, a direct question.

Do they as US citizens, have the protection of the constitution?
Are they classed as POW's and given the protection of the Geneva convention.
were you wrong to say that enemy combatant is the same as POW?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

BTW, have you found a suitable replacement for DU? One that performs as well or better but without the health problems? Thought not.

Why is the burden on ME to find a replacement. Have YOU found a replacement for mustard gas, which has, quite appropriately, been banned?

Because you are one of the folks bitching about it being used, that's why.

I would have bitched about mustard gas too. I guess mustard gas is fine with you.

I think DU should be banned, just like mustard gas.

Mustard gas is banned because of its explicit, demonstrable and intended effect.

DU is completely different, its intended and agreed effectiveness as a penetrator is not the problem (at least its opponents will not admit that's the problem). The opponents of DU point to marginal and unproven health concerns relating to side effects, in doing so they point to an unproven syndrome of immeasurable statistical significance with over a dozen alternative claimed causes and speculate, all while ignoring reasonable precautions that might mitigate any effects of exposure if it was a factor. In doing so they resort to the utterly scurrilous tactic of labeling the simple use of a metal in a munition as a WMD, and you KNOW this is by association with other isotopes used in real WMDs and nothing to do with the intrinsic properties of the metal.

You have used a number of specious arguments attacking DU, equating it to mustard gas is characteristically misleading.

[airdvr 210]

He was an american citizen, arrested in Chicago!

Padilla -- who also goes by the name of Abdullah Al Muhajir -- was arrested at O'Hare International Airport after arriving from Pakistan on a connecting flight through Zurich. A Muslim convert with a violent criminal past in the United States, Padilla had spent recent years in the Middle East.

He may technically be an american citizen but I think he was up to no good. Why do you think he suddenly decided he wanted to return to the U.S.? Certainly the government had some issues. They probably can't prove the "dirty bomb" theory but I have no problem with their actions here.

the first X people would be carted off. After that, people would start answering the door differently.

If a special class can be created for Padilla, a special class can be created for anyone.

Do you really think the gov't is gonna come knocking on your door and take you away? If that was the case 2/3 of the people posting here would be gone. Smokin that stuff makes you paranoid.

Actually, the reason we've seen no attacks is because I wear a necklace with a shark's tooth and a closing pin.

Overall, the United States and our partners have disrupted at least ten serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since September the 11th, including three al Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States. We've stopped at least five more al Qaeda efforts to case targets in the United States, or infiltrate operatives into our country. Because of this steady progress, the enemy is wounded -- but the enemy is still capable of global operations. Our commitment is clear: We will not relent until the organized international terror networks are exposed and broken, and their leaders held to account for their acts of murder. GWB 10/6/05

So much oversimplification going on here. You're looking for perfect and it doesn't exist. For clean and comfortable and it doesn't exist. And in all your pontification I haven't heard anyone say how they would handle it differently. You assume you know everything the gov't knows about these folks...whether it can be proved in a court of law or not. You don't and probably never will.

I'm glad that you're concerned and see your role as watchdog...keep up the good work. Leave the rest of it to the people who are tasked with the nearly impossible job of protecting US soil from people whose sole purpose is your death. I'd have to say they're doing just fine.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne