From: Ray Fischer on
Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>Bush is not a great orator, but he thinks pretty damn well. I see nothing
>wrong in his response to the attack.

I wonder how many lives might have been saved at the Pentagon if
somebody had acted quickly.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: Ray Fischer on
Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>"Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message
>> Look who owns the USA.... it's China. Bush has virtually bankrupted the
>> US and drained its industries fighting a terrorist group.
>
>Japan tops the list (with $644 billion), followed by China ($350 billion),
>United Kingdom ($239 ...

As usual, Graham is completely clueless.

China: 776.4
Japan: 711.8
UK: 214.0
OPEC: 191
etc.
http://www.treas.gov/tic/mfh.txt

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: Chris H on
In message <jnmla55kso7b6h341p16hc9vmpdbhmiq03(a)4ax.com>, DG
<xxxxxxxx(a)xxxxxx.xxxxxx> writes
>"Bill Graham" wrote:
>>
>>In WW-II spies were routinely shot on site, without any trial whatsoever.
>>Any enemy not in uniform was the definition of a "spy". Under this
>>definition, all of the Gitmo detainees could have been shot.....They are
>>lucky they are still alive.
>
>
>The country would be in a better position today if they had done that.
>Just one more bushie fuckup...

I agree. The Gitmo situation is illegal. None of the inmates have been
found guilty of anything. Due to their appalling (and illegal)
treatment those that get out are, not surprisingly, very anti USA and
want to fight back.

Had the US shot these civilians in the field the backlash would have
been less.

Trying to pretend the US had some legality or was doing the right thing
has made the situation worse.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



From: Chris H on
In message <rPudnYwqprXDXDfXnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Bill Graham
<weg9(a)comcast.net> writes
>
>"Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message news:l+pvJHTbVoqKFAU8@p
>haedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <h8dvlt$if4$1(a)news.acm.uiuc.edu>, "mcdonaldREMOVE TO ACTUALLY
>> REACH ME"@scs.uiuc.edu writes
>>>DG wrote:
>>>> Then why did he push people
>>>> to violate the Geneva Convention?
>>>He didn't. The Geneva Convention applies only to prisoners
>>>of war taken on a battlefield for formal battle. It does not apply to
>>>terrorists or spies.
>>
>> This is correct. Terrorist and spies etc come under LOCAL CIVILIAN LAW.
>> The are *EITHER* enemy combatants under the Geneva Convention or
>> Civilians. In either case due process should be applied and this does
>> not include tourture.
>>
>>>> Why did he commit war crimes?
>>>He didn't.
>>>Doug McDonald
>>
>> Just saying he didn't when you are a no one does not count when the
>> international organisations say the opposite.
>>
>> On the other hand Bush admitted it. Water boarding is torture.
>>
>> Actually Bush and co... devised their own definitions which the rest of
>> the world (and many Americans) say are simply made up and have no
>> validity.
>>
>They have all the validity they need. A law against torture means
>nothing unless and until you define, "Torture" If you exclude water
>boarding, then so be it.

Water boarding was not excluded by anyone except the Bush
administration. The whole world and International law says
waterboarding IS torture.

So if N. Korea says it is find to pick up Us citizens around the world,
lock them up and burn them with cigarettes it is OK because the N.
Koreans decided that is not torture and the rest of the world is wrong?
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



From: Bill Graham on

"DG" <xxxxxxxx(a)xxxxxx.xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6dmla5ljon0lt7i68d2sgka22l2q3rou5q(a)4ax.com...
> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>Bush could only have terrified the school kids he was working with at the
>>time....He wisely, left the classroom, and then found out more about what
>>was going on before he reacted......What any intelligent president would
>>have done.
>
>
> So you think bush reacted to the 9/11 news properly while in that
> classroom. Sitting for several minutes contorting his face while the
> country was under attack is idiocy.
>
Not at all......First, he thought (as did everyone else) that it was just an
accident. There was no reason to think it was an attack, until the second
plane struck the other tower. I have no idea what you think he could have
done about it, even if he knew it was an attack. It must have taken some
time before they decided to ground all but military aircraft, and even now,
I'm not sure just what good that did.....It almost killed that guy that was
bitten by a poisonous snake and couldn't get the anti venom from San
Diego...... This was a totally unexpected event, and there were several
different suggested responses to it, depending on whether you talked to
military people, or medical people, or people on the street. Even the
falling of the buildings was unexpected, since they didn't realize that the
fire would weaken the rebar inside the concrete beams and cause the top
stories to fall into the lower halves of the buildings.....Experienced
engineers didn't think of that until it happened. Of course, Rosy O'donnel
had it all figured out, but then there are few of her genius.....