Slo-Mo Looting

Page 8 of 11  
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:01:56 +0000, Charlie Self wrote:

If you mean because of the roles he played, then he was also making people believe he was a real cowboy? He got much closer to action in Viet Nam than Al Gore.

Age of 34 in 1941. Niven was 31 at the same time. He found time to make two movies while serving during the war. Fairbanks Jr was 31 on Pearl Harbor day. He served in the Navy. If either earned any medals, they apparently didn't feel the need to advertise the fact.

The military has it's own set of awards/medals. The congressional Gold Medal is isn't one of them.

I think you have it backwards - it wasn't popular to be pro-war in the '60s and '70s.

Again, I think you have it backwards - Viet Nam wasn't real popular and being a supporter wasn't either.
-Doug
--
"If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples
then you and I will still each have one apple.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug WInterburn writes:

And what relevance do medals have to serving? I know a bunch of good combat Marines who never got any medals who got nothing but PUCs and Good Conduct ribbons.
Speaking of age, Clark Gable, who served on bombers, was born in 1901. Gives him a leg up on super patriot doesn't it?

No shit. My point, exactly.

No, but I'd bet few of the antiwar protestors were apt to take a shot at Mr. Morrison.
Charlie Self "Bore, n.: A person who talks when you wish him to listen." Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:16:27 +0000, Charlie Self wrote:

The relavence is a recognition or their contributions, whether they were in the military or not. Guys like Bing Crosby and Bob Hope, like John Wayne, contributed immensely to troop morale through their USO involvement.

Yup, along with non military types like Crosby, Hope and Wayne:
Clark Gable - Captain, US Army Air Corps. Although beyond draft age, Clark Gable enlisted as a private in the Air Corps on Aug. 12, 1942 at Los Angeles. He attended Officers' Candidate School at Miami Beach and graduated as a second lieutenant. He then attended aerial gunnery school and in Feb. 1943, on personal orders from Gen. Arnold, went to England to make a motion picture of aerial gunners in action. He was assigned to the 351st Bomb Group at Polebrook and although neither ordered nor expected to do so, flew operational missions over Europe in B-17s to obtain the combat film footage he believed was required for producing the movie entitled "Combat America." Gable returned to the U.S. in Oct. 1943 and was relieved from active duty as a major on Jun. 12, 1944 at his own request, since he was over age for combat. [Source: US Air Force museum - wpafb.af.mil]

So what's the problem? I thought the left was of the opinion that _any_ medal can't be questioned.

No, but the Japanese and Viet Cong were likely to when he visited the front lines in the Pacific in WWII and Viet Nam.
--
"If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples
then you and I will still each have one apple.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jimmy Stewart!!!
Charlie Self wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jeez, don't you guys read the papers. It's not if you served, but rather what party you belong to.
Didn't matter for Bush Sr. or Dole, but does for Kerry.
And that's General Stewart, sir! Loved him in Strategic Air Command.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
General Jimmy Stewart!!!!!
Eddie Munster wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I thought he retired a colonel?
Grant P. Beagles wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I strongly suspect that 228 years ago that if which you are referring to was pointed at those that may try to carry over old rules, laws, and habits from the "Old Country". I also strongly suspect that the rules were written to protect those that may or may not be innocent from the common man that did not have the fairness or sense to tell if the accused was guilty or not when caught. That said, If I see the crime happen, I do not need a jury to decide if I really saw it or not.
Do you refer your case to a jury when you correct your child?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Leon writes:

WTF does that have to do with the Consitution? Or chasing and jumping on thieves by WalMart clerks?
Charlie Self "Bore, n.: A person who talks when you wish him to listen." Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Leon,
    You are falling into a trap. There seems to be some confusion here equating the act of *apprehending* a person suspected of committing a crime with an act of punishment for committing said crime. A jury conviction is not required to apprehend a suspected perpetrator of a crime. If the suspect resists apprehension, then reasonable force to effect that apprehension does not equate to punishment. If the perp (OK, the suspected perp) is allowed to resist and simply walk away, the amount of arrests for crimes will plummet and crime will skyrocket as criminals realize that with a slight amount of resistance they can escape, if they are careful to cover their tracks, they risk little chance of future apprehension.
Re-iterating: Apprehension is not punishment. Death because one has resisted being detained is not punishment, it is a consequence of one's actions. i.e., no resistance, no death, regardless of the ineptness of the one doing the detaining.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Secret Squirrel wrote:

Tell it the folks incarcerated at Gitmo.

So what, exactly, distinguishes a "cruel and unusual" punishment from a punishment that is not cruel or is usual or both?
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Unless I missed something, the Supreme Court recently re-affirmed these folks right to a trial. Keep in mind also that this only applies to US citizens. Foreign nationals are subject to the Geneva Convention. The failure to observe the Geneva Convention in this case is a disgrace on this administration, but a seperate issue altogether.

Well, winding up dead for petty theft would certainly qualify, which is what started this thread.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Secret Squirrel wrote:

Prisoners of war are subject to the Geneva Convention.

The Geneva Convention allows spies and saboteurs to be shot on sight.

You're saying that death is a cruel and unusual punishment? In any case, since the suspect died while being detained by civilians not in the employ of the US or any other government, that particular restriction does not apply--the constitution for the most part limits the powers of government, not of civilians. If I walk up to you and blow your brains out I have violated the law but the law I have violated is not part of the Constitution, it is part of the statutes of the locality in which I did this.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thats correct, and since the administration has labeled these people enemy combatants, they are by definition prisoners of war.

Also correct, however once taken into custody they become prisoners of war and enntitled to certain treatments which are still being withheld by this administration.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That is not correct.

That is also not correct. Certain specific conditions must be met in order for a prisoner to be subject to the Geneva Conventions; these include serving in a regular army or organized militia, and wearing the uniform or insignia thereof. The terrorists whom we captured do not meet these conditions, and they are not protected by the G.C.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Leon responds:

Uh, no, not so. The pesky Constitution was written to provide a basis for future laws. In 220 years, give or take, there have been very few changes to the document. And our founding fathers made it exceptionally difficult to change specifically to protect if from people who would prefer to ignore certain aspects, or to change them to suit their, or a locally fashionable, whim.
Charlie Self "Bore, n.: A person who talks when you wish him to listen." Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Secret Squirrel" wrote in message

George's point is that's the way it is _supposed_ to work, but not always. Judicial activism has always been around.
READ in it's ENTIRETY the following ... written by a judge, BTW:
http://www.open-spaces.com/article-v3n1-oscannlain.php
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 7/10/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yep, they failed to teach you how to read.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ok.. I'm going to bite on this despite knowing better. In what way is my interpretation flawed?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.comnotforme (Charlie Self) wrote in message

....and yet the Supreme Court does just that on a regular basis. An Oligarchy of 9 folks appointed for life that can make laws by decree...and we pretend to be a nation of law, not men. BTW if you are on the more liberal side you can decry the Oligarchy decreeing the "appointment" of our current President. On the more conservative side, the Oligarchy "found" by decree a right to murde..ahhhh abort your bab...ahhh fetus. So this isn't just a left-right diatribe (although from the emphasis added to the preceding you can easily guess which way I lean).
Dave Hall
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.