Richards

In this case there is a confession, so there is no possibility of that. I would be very prudent with the use of the death penalty for that reason. I would want proof in the form of a confession or DNA or the killer videotaping his crimes before I would do it but when the possibility of innocence is eliminated then it's time to throw out the garbage (execute him). Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Thank you for the warning. I would not want to expose young children to footage of such savage cruelty. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Hard to say. Sometimes great lecturer's will use inflamatory coments to provoke a reaction, which they hope to mold into a conversation, in the interest of developing critical thinking skills in students. That said, Hitler's atrocities (putting it lightly) were not events that took place hundreds of years ago, which could therefore be commented on in such a casual abstract ways. Given that many people from that era who suffered losses are still alive, comparative references to Hitler should be used with more discretion and sensitivity. In fairness I do not know the whole story and could be misreading this event, so my apologies if I am way off. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Well, you might not be impressive, but that summary was. (just a note, though..if you really look at history, you'll find that the jews were persecuted far earlier than Christianity's beginnings.) Ciels- Michele Gracias Michele, Obvious error on my part missing the pre-christianity persecution. I guess I was mostly refering to the lack of homeland status, that seemed to take place after christianity. Nonetheless, I did omit that and appreciate your correcting me. Cheers, Richards. My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

In the west we did far worse things in our past to our native populations than Isreal has done to the Palestinians, yet I can walk down a street without fear of suicide bombings. Nobody denies that ther were human rights violations in the displacement of arabs during the creation of Isreal. The concern is that in the UN everything that is done to Isreal by terrorists is justified by excuses based on other wrongdoings yet every single act on the part of Isrealis who are trying to defend themselves is condemed. I am not trying to whine for them but try to see their perspective. They have been persecuted since the rise of christianity. When us christians got bored of trying to destroy them the uprising of muslims took our place. As nomadic people who had no homeland they had to settle in various countries to try to set up new lives. Whenever the governments in those host countries needed a scapegoat for internal problems they had to pack up and move. During Hitlers rise, extreme anti-semetism was prevalent in the west which is why most of the concerns of Jews were ignored by the west. When Jews were trying to escape persecution many western countries refused them based on anti-sematic beleifs including Canada (so much for our nice guy image). After 6 million were wiped out, the west who had ignored their plight claimed that they did not know what was happening to them over there (despite the fact that Hitler had refered to his final solution in his book). Upon getting a new country they were attacked by several countries in more than one war. After all that, they now find themselves geographically cut off from the west in the only place they can truly call a safe home base yet they are surrounded on every border by countries who have wet dreams about wiping them off the face of the earth. One can hardly begrudge them for being a wee bit zealous about their defence. In perspective, if the west loses a war our military would come home with it's tail between it's legs but we would get over it ( and oliver stone &michael moorer would capitalize on it). If Isreal loses the seemingly inevitable war that it is facing Isreal is gone...every man woman and child will be slaughtered in a massacre that would eclipse the holocaust. Isreal faces the most grave threats from it's enemies and has the right to take extreme measures in defending itself. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Before wanting to restrict appeals, maybe you should take a look at the case of Anthony Porter, and imagine yourself in his place. I am not against the idea of an effective appeals process. I merely hate to see scumbag lawyers needlessly bogging down the process with red tape and leaving the victims families in limbo during that time. I don't know wher the line is drawn but at the present time the bad guys have far to much control in the system, and it comes at the expense of the victims. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

It's a shame. This clown should be sentenced to hang and allowed only one appeal (only if the defence can present a hell of an argument for one) which would be expedited in the interest of providing the victim's families with a sense of closure and justice. My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

***you have gotten you rig, your family, & your pets out of the house*** I know I am going to sound incredibly un-skydiverish but would you actually rescue your rig before your family as your order would sugest? Anyway, I would get family & pets first and if absolutely safe I would go for the rig. But then I am perhaps a big wimp. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

***Scoopy, you are wrong. If adrenaline is taking over control over your well trained actions, you simply are in wrong job and should definately only keep a broom in your hands. (Perhaps to ride home on it) German police as well as special forces are trained to "stop" with a shoot at first, in case of deadly danger for a victim, to place the lethal shoot immediately. Adrenaline never should have any influence on those actions. Though, I have to admit that for a simple police officer only dealing with speed racers or drunken teenies, adrenaline surely IS a point. But, they have to train permanently to keep cold blood in difficult situations. *** You can't help but let adrenaline take over when faced with a life and death situation. If you think about it logically many police officers will go their entire career without having ever fired a shot at someone. When it does happen it is frequently when a cop least expects it and has less than a second to respond and survive. Therefore if it does happen to a cop one afternoon after ten years of routine it will seem like a sudden blur of terror. Case studies have shown that in shootings regardless of training most cops end up going into instinct and reacting without thought or even looking through their sights (which is why so many departments now teach point shooting while looking at the target and not the sights). It is unconscionable to demand that someone in that job (who has a family he/she wants to go home to) waste precious milliseconds when someone three feet away is pointing a gun at them (most police shootings happen at a range of about three feet). I advocate minimum force when possible but when facing a gun 3 feet away it is not posible. The gunmen has made his choice and the cop shouldn't place themselves at undue risk to protect the perpetrater from the consequences of a situation he has choosen to make happen. Do not handcuff the people who go on the line to make our lives safer. Richards. My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Great White Shark. I would never eat people, I would simply swim past beaches with my dorsal fin sticking out of the water so I could be amused by the screaming people flailing towards the safety of land. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

I'm avowed areligious, pretty much atheist. And while I deplore religion, I still recognize that for us to call this guy and people like him "assholes" just because we disagree with his prosylitizing (holy shit I don't think I spelled that right...) reflects very badly on us, too. Let's remember, it's only because we see him from outside his worldview (and that of other religious people like him) that we think he's wrong and acting improperly. Others from his church may think he's a hero, doing "God's work. It's a very subjective thing, to call him and other religious people "assholes". Can't we disagree with his actions, and even his thoughts and beliefs, without calling names and ridiculing? We can simply constrain our discussion to whether it is appropriate or not for a cop to make religious overtones a part of how he does his police work. I personally deplore what the cop allegedly said. I think it has no place in the police precinct. But is he an "asshole" for holding views like he does? Dunno. From my point of view, probably. But mine is not the only point of view, now is it. - Ok in fairness my comments were not well thought out. Obviously the man did think he was doing the right thing, so I can grant him that. I still feel he should have refrained from suggesting that their religion was not real. As we are a culture of multiple religions people should attempt to realize that there are many versions of religion, and everyone values their own as much as you or I may value ours ( I am undecided on religion, so I think that makes me an agnostic). He is in a position of authority and trust so he would be able to do his job better if he could be more accepting of other religions. That said I probably went too far with refering to him in the derogatory manner that I did. I tend to get angry when I see nice people hurt and I overreact. This has gotten me in trouble in life from time to time as I tend to jump in and intervene when I see someone being wronged. Thank you for putting things into perspective. Cheers, Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

And someone felt that this gentleman was suited for carrying a gun, badge, nightstick for the purpose of enforcing the law which presumes that "justice is blind" ? Sorry for his remarks about your religion (assholes seem to have higher fertility rates and therefore breed faster than good people for some reason). Nonetheless it would be worth your while to embarrass the department by giving an interview to your local newspaper. You might just get a formal apology, or even better this bonehead will end up being a crosswalk guard. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Hasn't the argument for international participation been around for several years now? If I recall, one of the key roadblocks was the administration's unwillingness to give up some measure of control, both in terms of the military and in terms of civilian contracts, in order to secure international cooperation. Has that changed since then? I would imagine that by now with all the political fallout and discontent at home, the administration is eager to find a way out of this, so perhaps another round of calls for international intervention might yeild different results than it did last time. The administration might be releived to pass some degree of control off to someone else. Possibly not, but again there are not many other alternatives floating around so it is worth a try. Again solutions will be more usefull at this stage than roadblocks. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Uhm....if this is real go to the cops asap. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Sorry. I am the biggest wuss when it comes to scary movies...an utter disgrace to manhood! Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Ha ha, after we pissed all over our allies. (remember "Freedom Fries"?). I am one of your allies. I am Canadian. I think that the "Freedom fries" incident and other similar incedents were a long due response by the average American, to the constant barrage of Anti-American nonsense they are subjected to. A great deal of this nonsense came from France, Germany and yes Canada. I have on numerous occasion witnessed Americans in my country being treated poorly by my fellow citizen because they were Americans, and for the record I did speak up. If the entire world condemned Canada regardless of what we did or didn't do I would likely develop a "screw you " attitude to everyone else also. Do not forget that immediately after Sept 11 many of your so called allies immediately started blaming it on US foreign policy. Richards That is absolutely untrue. You have already expressed a disdain for history and your attitude shows. And on behalf of the American people, I thank the world for its outpouring of support. America will never forget the sounds of our National Anthem playing at Buckingham Palace, on the streets of Paris, and at Berlin's Brandenburg Gate. We will not forget South Korean children gathering to pray outside our embassy in Seoul, or the prayers of sympathy offered at a mosque in Cairo. We will not forget moments of silence and days of mourning in Australia and Africa and Latin America. George W. Bush, 9/20/2001 The civilized world is rallying to America's side. George W. Bush, 9/20/2001 The North Atlantic Council met tonight to express its solidarity with the United States of America at this moment of great tragedy and mourning. Our deepest sympathy lies with the victims, their families and all Americans. The NATO nations unanimously condemn these barbaric acts committed against a NATO member state. The mindless slaughter of so many innocent civilians is an unacceptable act of violence without precedent in the modern era. It underscores the urgency of intensifying the battle against terrorism, a battle that the NATO countries - indeed all civilised nations - must win. All Allies stand united in their determination to combat this scourge. At this critical moment, the United States can rely on its 18 Allies in North America and Europe for assistance and support. NATO solidarity remains the essence of our Alliance. Our message to the people of the United States is that we are with you. Our message to those who perpetrated these unspeakable crimes is equally clear: you will not get away with it. The North Atlantic Council, 9/11/2001 The overwhelming majority of allies including all of NATO declared total solidarity with the US after 9/11 and, supported the overthrow of the Taliban. The divergence followed the Bush/Blair lies and subsequent misadventures in Iraq, which has been a self-imposed clusterfuck by the US/UK. I can only go by what I have seen. There are a lot of people who unfairly hate the US, and condemn everything they do. I simply felt that I could see where this could lead to some backlash on the part of Americans. I was not trying to diminish the genuine offers of support offered by people around the world, who sympathized with the US for that terrible event. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

***We should correct that mistake first and allow the local politics to resolve themselves. Bring the US troops home. The problems there are no longer local. They are problems brought on by the invasion. We cannot bring our troops back until assure that the Iraqi people are in no worse a position than before the invasion. Richards.

False. Non-intervention and state sovereignty are well established concepts in international relations for hundreds of years. Einstein's definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Intervention has not resulted in a peaceful democartic Iraq. I'm uncertain why any reasonable person would expect different results by continued US presence in Iraq. I am not sure that you and I are debating the same issue. My points do not pertain to semantics or definitions, nor do they suggest what should have been done so much as what can be done now. I am interested in hearing whatever solutions we can come up with for Iraq now (not what should have been done). Do you have a constructive suggestion for the present situation? Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

I see your point and respect your opinion. I think we both agree that there is no simple answer to this. It is far more complex than that. Interesting debate though. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

OK fair enough. I realize that my point is over simplified, but the underlying reasoning is valid. As I have never been over there I can only surmise what is happenning by what I see in the news (admittedly an imperfect source) but it seems that many non-Iraqis are showing up to rally insurrections against the US troops. It is these elements that I refer to as rabble rousers. I can realize that many Iraqis are enraged by the invasion and I can see why many would be angry but surely there must be soem elements over there who would like to make the best of this and try to utilize the American presence to rebuild. The sooner Iraq is stabilized the sooner foreign troops can be pulled out. I cannot imagine that the average Iraqi is that different from the average American/Canadian in that they would rather allow a complete power vacuum that would result in a competition amongst warlords or a Taliban style government. The rabble rousers are the ones who want to see the US pull out before Iraq is capable of policing itself. Hypothetically if the US invaded Canada, and as a result several armed gunment were trying to wreak havok amongst our streets; regardless of how I felt about it I would not want to see the Marines pull out untill our own forces and government were capable of providing security. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

If we extend your analogy, The Bush Administration is the drunk driver. No one would expect the "drunk driver" to be capable of rendering aid to a sitiuation they screwed up on their own. Just like Vietnam, the problem in Iraq is local politics. This is what Prof. Kallend is referring to by "the consequences of forgotten history". Your analogy also serves to prove the point that local problems need local solutions not international intervention. *** Agin this would be a great point before the invasion but in the absense of a time machine, we cannot apply it retroactively, nor would it be sensible to focus on future lessons learned when the existing problem has not been resolved. After the invasion the existing government was removed and anarchy has started to reign. Therefore we in the west already intervened and the problem is no longer a purely local problem, it is one that is to some degree brought on by our actions. Intervention (which has already happened and can't be reversed) has created a new problem and now we need to look at how to minimize the effects of this intervention. A complete pullout leaves them not in the same situation we found them in but in a worse one of our creation. I realize the importance of expediting the process of Iraqi self determination but we have altered an infrastructure that they depended on and that does to some extent make us responsible for helping rebuild. I am not trying to be difficult here but I can't help but feel that there is too much emphasis on assigning blame and none on solving the problem. I am certainly not claiming to have the solution, I am merely saying that it is time for cooler heads to cooperate and try to find one. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Ha ha, after we pissed all over our allies. (remember "Freedom Fries"?). I am one of your allies. I am Canadian. I think that the "Freedom fries" incident and other similar incedents were a long due response by the average American, to the constant barrage of Anti-American nonsense they are subjected to. A great deal of this nonsense came from France, Germany and yes Canada. I have on numerous occasion witnessed Americans in my country being treated poorly by my fellow citizen because they were Americans, and for the record I did speak up. If the entire world condemned Canada regardless of what we did or didn't do I would likely develop a "screw you " attitude to everyone else also. Do not forget that immediately after Sept 11 many of your so called allies immediately started blaming it on US foreign policy. Whatever anyones opinion on US foreign policy it takes a certain degree of heartlessnes to make comments like that immediately after such a tragedy. Again when you have tried to gain support in the UN, most of your motions were blocked just because they were forwarded by the US. At some point the average US citizen has a breaking point and will start to snap back. Regardles of anyones political position, the US has done far more good with it's foreign policy than it has bad, and many of us benefit greatly from the fact that the US is willing to play world police, for example; South Korea would be owned by Kim Jong Il Kuwait would belong to Saddam Croats would still be getting slaughtered by Serbs while the UN twiddled it's thumbs pretending they were making a difference (while finding some way to blame this on the US) Canada would need a real army... ...etc. While the rest of the western world may noy see eye to eye with the US position they should at least try to work out some sort of agreement whereby they can get over old petty greivances and think/act progressively. They should also try to remind themselves that while they were offended by the "freedom fries" incedent, they have taken their fair share of potshots at America. Cheers, Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Perhaps a larger contingent of international forces might be usefull in two ways. One it will help a rather thinly stretched US military the opportunity to rest and regroup. Furthermore a more international mix might make it harder for the rabble rousers over there to try and present it as a domination rather than help. Again I think this is one of those moments where the international community needs to do a character check and be willing to do whatever it can to help. It is also worth noting that during war, enemy leaders pay close attention to both the support of the international community, and the mood of the nation at home. When Al Qaeda leaders see the US unable to get support from the international community (even if it is merely moral support) this emboldens them. They also pay attention to US politics and when they see the opposition party (Democrats) playing up public misgivings about the war for political gain whilst promoting discontent amongst the American public, they realize that the war is one of resolve and since Al-Qaeda does not have an opposition party the are encouraged by feeling they will win on resolve. It is not unlike a child who plays two parents against each-other (admittedly not the best analogy). If the Al-Qaeda leadeship saw the Repiblicans and the Democrats supporting the war effort and saw the international community providing support for the war in any way they can the will feel significantly less emboldened. I do not have a solution myself but, there needs to be some real dialogue as to how this can be resolved. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

ABSOLUTELY WRONG! "Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it." This quagmire, voluntarily entered into by Bush and Blair, is a lesson of history. That is true, however innapropriate in this context. Let me give you an example. We use the fact that impared driving has caused deaths historically to create awareness of this so we can hopefully prevent future tragedies. Suppose I were to arrive at the scene of an accident where a drunk driver had just nailed another car and the victim in the other car was a single mother who was rapidly bleeding to death. Should I then stand by and wag my finger at the drunk driver all the while ignoring the dying woman because it is more important to ream him out as "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" and "besides why should I do anything when it was he who drove drunk and therefor saving her life is his responsibility"? Common sense dictates that we prioritise, which in that case means rendering first aid, and being judgemental on the driver after we have saved the womans life. If she was your mother/wife/sister and I did nothing to help would you accept my saying "Hey, I was not the one that hit her so I had no obligation to help, it's that other guys fault" Presently Iraq is bleeding to death. Later on when the international community has helped resolve the problem we may then have the luxury of reflecting upon it, and learning from any mistakes. Sitting here in judgement and letting this tragedy play out as we do nothing just because too many people have this fixation on seeing the US fail is morally contemptible. Anyone can stand on the sidelines and laugh at those who try, and make mistakes. Character is about knowing when you should try to do your best to help in whatever limmitted way you can, regardles of whether or not it is "not our fault". Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

Oops sorry about ommitting the UK. Again though the US is carrying a larger burden. I never denied that the US/UK were the ones that went in and created it but that does not change the fact that we have a moral obligation to try to help as it is the Iraqi people who stand to pay the highest price. I fail to see how standing by and not helping is justified because "we did not start it". We did not create the tsunami that leveled parts of Asia, so based on your argument we have no obligation to help. We did not create drought in East Africa, so are we then not morally obliged to help. Again you reduce this to finger pointing at the US. That is like my refuseing to render first aid to someone that you ran over with your car and justifying my lack of action by saying "I was not the one who did it". If the Iraq mission fails the Iraqui people will suffer hideously and while the left will have the smug satisfaction of pointing the finger at the US, they will also have to carry the guilt of realizing that they could have helped but stood by and said "it's not my problem because I did not start it". Incedentally since the West did not start the holocaust could we be morally justified in letting Hitler do what he wanted because we felt that Britain and France created this problem by capitalizing on Germany's defeat in WW1 and destroying their economy with the conditions set down by the Treaty of Versailles, thus humiliating all German people and inflicting needless poverty just because they were the victors. Again it's time for mature debate about solutions, not finger pointing. Richards My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.