9/11 - Four Years Later

[Richard Boye]

Wounds. Should. Heal.

They should.

Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Mister President, where is Osama bin Laden? Is he hiding under your
desk, oh so comically, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Nearly three thousand of my neighbors were murdered, four years ago, in
the heart of America, and we still await our justice. The hole is still
there.

Mister Bush, where is Osama bin Laden? Do you still care?

[Robert Mee]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?
Mister President, where is Osama bin Laden? Is he hiding under your
desk, oh so comically, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Nearly three thousand of my neighbors were murdered, four years ago, in
the heart of America, and we still await our justice. The hole is still
there.
Mister Bush, where is Osama bin Laden? Do you still care?

Mr. Bush,

4 years ago, I sat on a college campus less than 15 miles from a smoking
Pentagon. The hunt for Osama was on. And then, supposedly, we were
going after Saddam Hussein because he was Osama's best buddy. We've
captured Saddam Hussein, and yet we still do not know where Osama bin
Laden is hiding. Do we even know if he's still alive? Why are our
young men and women being shot at in Iraq when the Iraqis really had
nothing to do with the tragedy that ended so many lives 4 years ago?
Why are we still at war?

[Jim Seay]

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?
Mister President, where is Osama bin Laden? Is he hiding under your
desk, oh so comically, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Nearly three thousand of my neighbors were murdered, four years ago, in
the heart of America, and we still await our justice. The hole is still
there.
Mister Bush, where is Osama bin Laden? Do you still care?

Mr. Bush,
4 years ago, I sat on a college campus less than 15 miles from a smoking
Pentagon. The hunt for Osama was on. And then, supposedly, we were
going after Saddam Hussein because he was Osama's best buddy. We've
captured Saddam Hussein, and yet we still do not know where Osama bin
Laden is hiding. Do we even know if he's still alive? Why are our
young men and women being shot at in Iraq when the Iraqis really had
nothing to do with the tragedy that ended so many lives 4 years ago? Why
are we still at war?

AS to why we are in Iraq, maybe you should be asking George Herbert
Walker Bush, Bill Clinton, or Kofi Annan. They were the leaders who let
the Gulf War languish on far longer than it should. All George W. Bush
did was finish a fight which was started back in 1990.

Why do I say this? Wars throughout history have ended one of three ways:

1) One side gets wiped out
2) One side surrenders, to avoid getting wiped out
3) A peace treaty is signed by the combatants

In the case of the Gulf War, all we had was a ceasefire, which is the
military equivalent of a time out. Why else do you think we kept troops,
and planes, in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia all those years? It wasn't to
'enforce UN sanctions'. It was in anticipation of the war 'going hot'.
It is the same reason we maintain 2 heavy divisions of troops in South
Korea to this day.

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Jim Seay

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?
Mister President, where is Osama bin Laden? Is he hiding under your
desk, oh so comically, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Nearly three thousand of my neighbors were murdered, four years ago, in
the heart of America, and we still await our justice. The hole is still
there.
Mister Bush, where is Osama bin Laden? Do you still care?

Mr. Bush,
4 years ago, I sat on a college campus less than 15 miles from a smoking
Pentagon. The hunt for Osama was on. And then, supposedly, we were
going after Saddam Hussein because he was Osama's best buddy. We've
captured Saddam Hussein, and yet we still do not know where Osama bin
Laden is hiding. Do we even know if he's still alive? Why are our
young men and women being shot at in Iraq when the Iraqis really had
nothing to do with the tragedy that ended so many lives 4 years ago? Why
are we still at war?

AS to why we are in Iraq, maybe you should be asking George Herbert
Walker Bush, Bill Clinton, or Kofi Annan. They were the leaders who let
the Gulf War languish on far longer than it should. All George W. Bush
did was finish a fight which was started back in 1990.
1) One side gets wiped out
2) One side surrenders, to avoid getting wiped out
3) A peace treaty is signed by the combatants
In the case of the Gulf War, all we had was a ceasefire, which is the
military equivalent of a time out. Why else do you think we kept troops,
and planes, in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia all those years? It wasn't to
'enforce UN sanctions'. It was in anticipation of the war 'going hot'.
It is the same reason we maintain 2 heavy divisions of troops in South
Korea to this day.

Lets bring our troops home, so that we can deploy them along the Mexican
border to deter illegal immigrants!

[Ryan don't call me gunga MacIntosh]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?
Mister President, where is Osama bin Laden? Is he hiding under your
desk, oh so comically, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Nearly three thousand of my neighbors were murdered, four years ago, in
the heart of America, and we still await our justice. The hole is still
there.
Mister Bush, where is Osama bin Laden? Do you still care?

Call me a crazy conspiracy theorist, but I've been of the belief that
osama was found and shot at least 3 years ago. But if Someone wanted to
maintain public support for a war, witholding that sort of information
might be a good idea.

[Lorfarius]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?
Mister President, where is Osama bin Laden? Is he hiding under your
desk, oh so comically, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Nearly three thousand of my neighbors were murdered, four years ago, in
the heart of America, and we still await our justice. The hole is still
there.
Mister Bush, where is Osama bin Laden? Do you still care?
--

Are you all simple? Bin Laden is/was based deep within the middle east. Over
there he is practically a hero. The people love him and wouldnt turn him in
as none of them give a toss about the West or what happens to innocents (as
the likes of the Spanish/London bombings shown). He could easily slip into
hiding for years if he wished.

Plus what good would his death do anyway? He represents a splintered group
of radicals who have no leader to report to. They come up with an idea and
go do it without approval. They are terrorists trying to achieve what they
perceive as a religious and righteous cause and the death of one leader
would only create a martyr to their cause. Sad but true :(

[Kurt Montandon]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:39:44 +0100, "Lorfarius"

Post by Lorfarius
Are you all simple? Bin Laden is/was based deep within the middle east. Over
there he is practically a hero. The people love him and wouldnt turn him in
as none of them give a toss about the West or what happens to innocents (as
the likes of the Spanish/London bombings shown). He could easily slip into
hiding for years if he wished.

Ah, yes, the "It would be hard" argument.

Unlike a massive, conventional invasion of a nation-state followed by
a years long occupation and counter-insurgency.

Post by Lorfarius
Plus what good would his death do anyway? He represents a splintered group
of radicals who have no leader to report to. They come up with an idea and
go do it without approval. They are terrorists trying to achieve what they
perceive as a religious and righteous cause and the death of one leader
would only create a martyr to their cause. Sad but true :(

Well, by all means, let's not bother extracting either justice or
revenge upon those who attack us. Yup, next time there's a massive
terrorist attack, I'll be waiting for you to hop right up and say "No,
we can't go after the leaders - they'll just gain power in death!"

These arguments have more than a whiff of desparation - they're the
last line of defense for Bush apologists.

Of course, I'm sure you'll point out next that you didn't vote for
him.

[Lorfarius]

Post by Kurt Montandon
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:39:44 +0100, "Lorfarius"

Post by Lorfarius
Are you all simple? Bin Laden is/was based deep within the middle east. Over
there he is practically a hero. The people love him and wouldnt turn him in
as none of them give a toss about the West or what happens to innocents (as
the likes of the Spanish/London bombings shown). He could easily slip into
hiding for years if he wished.

Ah, yes, the "It would be hard" argument.
Unlike a massive, conventional invasion of a nation-state followed by
a years long occupation and counter-insurgency.

Why are the 2 connected? Theres no actual link between Bin Laden and Iraq.
Even your own government admitted that.

Post by Kurt Montandon

Post by Lorfarius
Plus what good would his death do anyway? He represents a splintered group
of radicals who have no leader to report to. They come up with an idea and
go do it without approval. They are terrorists trying to achieve what they
perceive as a religious and righteous cause and the death of one leader
would only create a martyr to their cause. Sad but true :(

Well, by all means, let's not bother extracting either justice or
revenge upon those who attack us. Yup, next time there's a massive
terrorist attack, I'll be waiting for you to hop right up and say "No,
we can't go after the leaders - they'll just gain power in death!"

What I was trying to point out to the OP was that killing Bin Laden wouldnt
actually achieve alot except making him martyr to even more terrorists.
However I have no problem with capturing, trying him in a court of law. The
problem is you cant use diplomacy with these people because all they want to
do is to fight. Their right of war as they see it is a religious struggle
approved by God etc.

Post by Kurt Montandon
These arguments have more than a whiff of desparation - they're the
last line of defense for Bush apologists.

Actually I was againest the invasion of Iraq. I felt it was nothing more
than a land grab for oil. If you want to go after a major world threat why
not go for somewhere like Korea who are a hell of a lot more advanced than
Hussain ever was.

Plus why are they desperate arguements? Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes. Also you seem to be forgetting
that it was YOUR country that voted him back in. Maybe if more of you Bush
haters had voted he wouldnt have been in?

Post by Kurt Montandon
Of course, I'm sure you'll point out next that you didn't vote for
him.

Well no I didnt. I live in the UK and last time I looked we couldnt vote for
American Presidents. And before you point out that I probably voted for Tony
Blair & the labour party, well no I didnt do that either.

[Tom Kelsall]

<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?

[David Loewe, Jr.]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 14:42:44 GMT, Tom Kelsall

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law.

Cite?

Post by Tom Kelsall
I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?

[Lorfarius]

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?
--
Tom Kelsall
Remove caps to email

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

[Davian]

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

It's an amendment to the Constitution. Bush can say pretty much anything he
likes, but his chances of actually getting it changed are pretty damn slim.
And getting it changed before he leaves office, just about zero. It could
only be undone by another amendment to the Constitution, and that takes years
to pass.

First he would have to get a 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress to
propose the amendment. (Or 2/3 of the states to request a "national
convention" to propose amendments.) After that, he would need to get it
approved by legislatures or conventions in 3/4 of the states.

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, "Davian"

Post by Davian

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

It's an amendment to the Constitution. Bush can say pretty much anything he
likes, but his chances of actually getting it changed are pretty damn slim.
And getting it changed before he leaves office, just about zero. It could
only be undone by another amendment to the Constitution, and that takes years
to pass.
First he would have to get a 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress to
propose the amendment. (Or 2/3 of the states to request a "national
convention" to propose amendments.) After that, he would need to get it
approved by legislatures or conventions in 3/4 of the states.

Essentially, it would be damn near impossible. Failing that - a coup,
possibly militarily.

But even that would never work - too novel, too relegated to the world
of film to work in the public consciousness.

Or so I happen to think.

(Besides, US'ers images of themselves are too furiously tied to their
government and certain ideas about what that means. No no, it would
take something incredible)


Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[Kyle Storm]

Post by Davian

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

It's an amendment to the Constitution. Bush can say pretty much anything he
likes, but his chances of actually getting it changed are pretty damn slim.
And getting it changed before he leaves office, just about zero. It could
only be undone by another amendment to the Constitution, and that takes years
to pass.
First he would have to get a 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress to
propose the amendment. (Or 2/3 of the states to request a "national
convention" to propose amendments.) After that, he would need to get it
approved by legislatures or conventions in 3/4 of the states.
--
Jeff
Davian / Dearic

It's been proposed in a bipartisan bill already.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.J.RES.24.IH:

To be fair, however, there's no way this could get passed during Bush's
term.

Storm

(Off topic, does anyone know if it's possible to use hyperlinks through
google groups. I tried surrounding the above url with anchor tags but
it didn't work in the preview.)

[Robert Mee]

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?
--
Tom Kelsall
Remove caps to email

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

The Constitution (The Law of the Land) can indeed be changed, and in
fact it has been 26 or 27 times since the founding of the US. They're
called amendments, and if W were to attempt to push through an amendment
unlimiting the number of terms a president can have, it would be the
second time that the Constitution has been amended to eliminate another
amendment.

[Davian]

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

The Constitution (The Law of the Land) can indeed be changed, and in
fact it has been 26 or 27 times since the founding of the US.

18 times actually, in 225 years.

Post by Robert Mee
They're
called amendments, and if W were to attempt to push through an amendment
unlimiting the number of terms a president can have, it would be the
second time that the Constitution has been amended to eliminate another
amendment.

W doesn't have anywhere near the support that would be needed to pass a
Constitutional amendment. He won the vote by barely over 50 percent, not 75.

But feel free to continue panicking if it makes you feel better.

[Robert Mee]

Post by Davian

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc

etc?

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Lorfarius
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

The Constitution (The Law of the Land) can indeed be changed, and in
fact it has been 26 or 27 times since the founding of the US.

18 times actually, in 225 years.

Post by Robert Mee
They're
called amendments, and if W were to attempt to push through an amendment
unlimiting the number of terms a president can have, it would be the
second time that the Constitution has been amended to eliminate another
amendment.

W doesn't have anywhere near the support that would be needed to pass a
Constitutional amendment. He won the vote by barely over 50 percent, not 75.
But feel free to continue panicking if it makes you feel better.

Actually, I'm not panicking at all. As to the 18 times, the Bill of
Rights are considered amendments to the Constitution... and so the grand
total stands at 28 times.

[Davian]

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Davian
W doesn't have anywhere near the support that would be needed to pass a
Constitutional amendment. He won the vote by barely over 50 percent, not 75.
But feel free to continue panicking if it makes you feel better.

Actually, I'm not panicking at all. As to the 18 times, the Bill of
Rights are considered amendments to the Constitution... and so the grand
total stands at 28 times.

All ten were done at once. It's been changed 18 times, for 27 total changes.

[Emma]

lets get picky

[Jasper Janssen]

Post by Davian

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Davian
W doesn't have anywhere near the support that would be needed to pass a
Constitutional amendment. He won the vote by barely over 50 percent, not

75.

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Davian
But feel free to continue panicking if it makes you feel better.

Actually, I'm not panicking at all. As to the 18 times, the Bill of
Rights are considered amendments to the Constitution... and so the grand
total stands at 28 times.

All ten were done at once. It's been changed 18 times, for 27 total changes.

They're separate amendments, don't be a fucking pedant. Also, graph how
many amendments happened in any given amount of time. YOu'll notice that
-- especially if you ignore the first 10 -- the constitution was pretty
much never amended for a long time, and most of the amendments were
relatively recent.


Jasper

[Davian]

Post by Jasper Janssen

Post by Davian

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Davian
W doesn't have anywhere near the support that would be needed to pass a
Constitutional amendment. He won the vote by barely over 50 percent, not

75.

Post by Robert Mee

Post by Davian
But feel free to continue panicking if it makes you feel better.

Actually, I'm not panicking at all. As to the 18 times, the Bill of
Rights are considered amendments to the Constitution... and so the grand
total stands at 28 times.

All ten were done at once. It's been changed 18 times, for 27 total changes.

They're separate amendments, don't be a fucking pedant. Also, graph how
many amendments happened in any given amount of time. YOu'll notice that
-- especially if you ignore the first 10 -- the constitution was pretty
much never amended for a long time, and most of the amendments were
relatively recent.

1) Fuck off.

2) The point is, it's not nearly as simple as Bush saying "I want to get rid
of the term limits, change it." Thousands of laws have been passed, but
amendments have been less than twenty times. It's not going to happen, and a
lot of people appear to be getting worked up over nothing.

[Jasper Janssen]

Post by Davian
2) The point is, it's not nearly as simple as Bush saying "I want to get rid
of the term limits, change it." Thousands of laws have been passed, but
amendments have been less than twenty times. It's not going to happen, and a
lot of people appear to be getting worked up over nothing.

Yeah, that anti-gay-marriage amendment is dead in the water.

Jasper

[Jasper Janssen]

Post by Davian
W doesn't have anywhere near the support that would be needed to pass a
Constitutional amendment. He won the vote by barely over 50 percent, not 75.

So? That's not the bar.

3/4 of the *states*, not of the popular vote. And 3/4 of the states he's a
fuck of a lot closer to than 3/4 of the popular vote.


Jasper

[t***@rci.rogers.com]

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?
--
Tom Kelsall
Remove caps to email

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

It wasn't always that way. Case in point, FDR. Laws change. Even
election laws.


Todd

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space,

Post by t***@rci.rogers.com

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?
--
Tom Kelsall
Remove caps to email

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

It wasn't always that way. Case in point, FDR. Laws change. Even
election laws.

One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

Post by t***@rci.rogers.com
Todd

Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[Jasper Janssen]

Post by Ilya the Recusant
One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

George Bush the first, George Bush the second, Jeb Bush the first in '08?
Who needs more than two terms per person if you have an extended family
that large?

Jasper

[David Loewe, Jr.]

Post by Jasper Janssen

Post by Ilya the Recusant
One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

George Bush the first, George Bush the second, Jeb Bush the first in '08?

And George P in 2016...

Post by Jasper Janssen
Who needs more than two terms per person if you have an extended family
that large?

[Jennifer Winters]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 23:17:11 GMT, Jasper Janssen

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:02:10 -0500, Ilya the Recusant

Post by Ilya the Recusant
One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

George Bush the first, George Bush the second, Jeb Bush the first in '08?

And George P in 2016...

One word: Jenna.

[David Loewe, Jr.]

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:18:56 GMT, "Jennifer Winters"

Post by Jennifer Winters

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 23:17:11 GMT, Jasper Janssen

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:02:10 -0500, Ilya the Recusant

Post by Ilya the Recusant
One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

George Bush the first, George Bush the second, Jeb Bush the first in '08?

And George P in 2016...

One word: Jenna.

She can run in 2024.

And, at some point, they'll refer to the President as "The Bush" just
like the Romans referred to the Emperor as "Caesar." Who knew on that
awful night in 1992 that we actually witnessing the birth of a
dynasty?









































I wonder how hard someone's gonna bite on THAT stink bate...

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, Jasper

Post by Jasper Janssen

Post by Ilya the Recusant
One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

George Bush the first, George Bush the second, Jeb Bush the first in '08?
Who needs more than two terms per person if you have an extended family
that large?

Were that the case, I'd be really tempted to want someone to take this
nepotism law just a tad bit further:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d094:29:./temp/~bd9Ebn:@@@L

And at least in Texas (and Montana?) it's something would-be
government officials are required to take note of.

Still, I think I can hear a pack of NGO's quietly loading their desert
eagles.

Post by Jasper Janssen
Jasper

Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[David Loewe, Jr.]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 01:05:00 -0500, Ilya the Recusant

Post by Ilya the Recusant
In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, Jasper

Post by Jasper Janssen

Post by Ilya the Recusant
One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

George Bush the first, George Bush the second, Jeb Bush the first in '08?
Who needs more than two terms per person if you have an extended family
that large?

Were that the case, I'd be really tempted to want someone to take this

Why would the people hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all) members of the same family to do the same job one after
the other be nepotism?

Post by Ilya the Recusant
And at least in Texas (and Montana?) it's something would-be
government officials are required to take note of.
Still, I think I can hear a pack of NGO's quietly loading their desert
eagles.

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, "David

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 01:05:00 -0500, Ilya the Recusant

Post by Ilya the Recusant
In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, Jasper

Post by Jasper Janssen

Post by Ilya the Recusant
One of the things I have to give North Americans credit for - they
will scream quite vociferously at the slightest wiff or scent of
anything that might be the movement towards totalitarianism,
dictatorship, etc.

George Bush the first, George Bush the second, Jeb Bush the first in '08?
Who needs more than two terms per person if you have an extended family
that large?

Were that the case, I'd be really tempted to want someone to take this

Why would the people hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all) members of the same family to do the same job one after
the other be nepotism?

You're telling me you're not the least bit bothered by the idea of Jeb
Bush being elected president after his brother was president?

Not even a little bit?

A teensy weensy bit?


Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[Daniel Packman]

Post by Ilya the Recusant
In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, "David

.....

Post by Ilya the Recusant

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
Why would the people hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all) members of the same family to do the same job one after
the other be nepotism?

You're telling me you're not the least bit bothered by the idea of Jeb
Bush being elected president after his brother was president?

Bothered, yes. But nepotism means that those who choose the officerholder
are related to the future holder. The problem here is very troubling,
but it isn't nepotism.

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space,

Post by Daniel Packman
those who choose the officerholder
are related to the future holder.

Which leads me to wonder if Bush Sr. voted for Bush Jr. After all, you
can't be denied the right to vote for a certain party in the US...

And as Lurks said - "hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all)." And they're related.


Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[David Loewe, Jr.]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:19:27 -0500, Ilya the Recusant

Post by Ilya the Recusant
In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space,

Post by Daniel Packman
those who choose the officerholder
are related to the future holder.

Which leads me to wonder if Bush Sr. voted for Bush Jr. After all, you
can't be denied the right to vote for a certain party in the US...
And as Lurks said - "hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all)." And they're related.

It takes more than one vote to hire in this case.

Why don't you just admit that your use of the word nepotism was wrong?

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, "David

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:19:27 -0500, Ilya the Recusant

Post by Ilya the Recusant
In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space,

Post by Daniel Packman
those who choose the officerholder
are related to the future holder.

Which leads me to wonder if Bush Sr. voted for Bush Jr. After all, you
can't be denied the right to vote for a certain party in the US...
And as Lurks said - "hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all)." And they're related.

It takes more than one vote to hire in this case.
Why don't you just admit that your use of the word nepotism was wrong?

You seem to be suggesting that it's only nepotism if the person being
sought out for hiring actually gets the job. Yet the definition of
nepotism does not require that to be true. It only requires that
favouritism be shown to members of one's own family for a given
function because of family relation, rather than on the basis of merit
or legal claim.

Also, I am inclined to agree with Jasper - the problem is that the
Pres of necessity has a lot of influence over who gets elected the
next time. Viz voter fraud allegations.

This isn't a major point of contention for me, but it does exist.


Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[Jasper Janssen]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 08:12:54 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
Why would the people hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all) members of the same family to do the same job one after
the other be nepotism?

The problem is that the Pres of necessity has a lot of influence over who
gets elected the next time. Viz voter fraud allegations.

Jasper

[David Loewe, Jr.]

Post by Jasper Janssen
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 08:12:54 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
Why would the people hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all) members of the same family to do the same job one after
the other be nepotism?

The problem is that the Pres of necessity has a lot of influence over who
gets elected the next time. Viz voter fraud allegations.

Do you need some new tinfoil?

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space, "David

Post by David Loewe, Jr.

Post by Jasper Janssen
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 08:12:54 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
Why would the people hiring (because that's what an election really
is, after all) members of the same family to do the same job one after
the other be nepotism?

The problem is that the Pres of necessity has a lot of influence over who
gets elected the next time. Viz voter fraud allegations.

Do you need some new tinfoil?

To butter my cheese.

Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Lorfarius

Post by Tom Kelsall
<SNIP>!!

Post by Lorfarius
Bush doesnt need to be apologised
for hes in his last term in office, he cant get back so what he does now
doesnt really matter when it comes to votes.

Side note: He has been heard to say that he wants to change that
particular law. I don't know if he's started down the legislative
road, but he's been heard to say it. Can you say "Dictator"?
--
Tom Kelsall
Remove caps to email

Really? I thought that was part of law of the land, cant be changed etc etc?
Sorry but my American history knowledge isnt up to much.

Just pass a Constitutional Amendment repealing the one that limits Presidents to
two terms.

[David Chapman]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Not all murderers are caught, even when we know who they are.

A better question would be why nothing has been done with the site of the
WTC. I mean, that's prime real estate in Manhattan, some of the most
valuable square footage in the world - no way has nobody asked. It's not a
matter of respect for the dead, either; I doubt any company would be stupid
enough not to include a monument in their plans. No, I think the rubble
itself has been left as a monument, but not one to remind us of the dead.

I think it's been left to remind you of the terror.

That's why your wounds haven't healed. They have purposefully been kept
open so that Bush can wage his little war and keep an unruly population in
line.

[James Hammons]

Post by David Chapman

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Not all murderers are caught, even when we know who they are.
A better question would be why nothing has been done with the site of the
WTC. I mean, that's prime real estate in Manhattan, some of the most
valuable square footage in the world - no way has nobody asked. It's not a
matter of respect for the dead, either; I doubt any company would be stupid
enough not to include a monument in their plans. No, I think the rubble
itself has been left as a monument, but not one to remind us of the dead.
I think it's been left to remind you of the terror.
That's why your wounds haven't healed. They have purposefully been kept
open so that Bush can wage his little war and keep an unruly population in
line.

IIRC the rubble itself has been removed. The holdup now is a design
for the replacement that satisfies enough of the different groups to be
accepted.

--
James Hammons

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:18:34 +0100, "David Chapman"

Post by David Chapman
A better question would be why nothing has been done with the site of the
WTC. I mean, that's prime real estate in Manhattan, some of the most
valuable square footage in the world - no way has nobody asked. It's not a
matter of respect for the dead, either; I doubt any company would be stupid
enough not to include a monument in their plans. No, I think the rubble
itself has been left as a monument, but not one to remind us of the dead.

Dude? a) the rubble hasn't been left, it was cleared away even when I was
in New York at the end of 2002 (in other words, less than a year later)
and b) the building permits are currently under review by the city
council. The problem is c) nobody wants to (allow anyone to) build
something *smaller* than the WTC there, which means that this is a Huge
Freaking Project. Not the sort of thing you can throw together in a hurry,
or it'll fall down by itself not too much later, and that would *really*
suck. Also, a lot of the WTC was empty even at the time cause they
couldn't find takers, and something with as much or more square footage as
the WTC will seriously depress the real estate market in Manhattan, as
long as the economy doesn't improve first.


Jasper

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Jasper Janssen
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:18:34 +0100, "David Chapman"

Post by David Chapman
A better question would be why nothing has been done with the site of the
WTC. I mean, that's prime real estate in Manhattan, some of the most
valuable square footage in the world - no way has nobody asked. It's not a
matter of respect for the dead, either; I doubt any company would be stupid
enough not to include a monument in their plans. No, I think the rubble
itself has been left as a monument, but not one to remind us of the dead.

Dude? a) the rubble hasn't been left, it was cleared away even when I was
in New York at the end of 2002 (in other words, less than a year later)
and b) the building permits are currently under review by the city
council. The problem is c) nobody wants to (allow anyone to) build
something *smaller* than the WTC there, which means that this is a Huge
Freaking Project. Not the sort of thing you can throw together in a hurry,
or it'll fall down by itself not too much later, and that would *really*
suck. Also, a lot of the WTC was empty even at the time cause they
couldn't find takers, and something with as much or more square footage as
the WTC will seriously depress the real estate market in Manhattan, as
long as the economy doesn't improve first.

But think of all the jobs rebuilding the WTC would create!

[Jason 'Warlocke' Lewis]

Post by David Chapman

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Not all murderers are caught, even when we know who they are.
A better question would be why nothing has been done with the site of the
WTC. I mean, that's prime real estate in Manhattan, some of the most
valuable square footage in the world - no way has nobody asked. It's not a
matter of respect for the dead, either; I doubt any company would be stupid
enough not to include a monument in their plans. No, I think the rubble
itself has been left as a monument, but not one to remind us of the dead.
I think it's been left to remind you of the terror.
That's why your wounds haven't healed. They have purposefully been kept
open so that Bush can wage his little war and keep an unruly population in
line.

Actually, tower 7 (I think that's the one) has already been replaced with a
new building. Last I heard though, it was still vacant. The fact is, the
companies that occupied the WTC before the attack have moved on and into new
buildings. They aren't going to spend the time and money moving back in just
for the hell of it.
The proposed plans for the rest of the land have been a source of much
controversy with many being shot down. One set of plans (the current ones?)
was even blasted by Donald Trump as being garbage. Not that I would give a
shit what that self-important gasbag had to say, but still, it shows what
kind of roadblocks will have to be overcome before there is anything but a
basement where the towers once stood.

-----------
Jason Lewis

[Michael Hoye]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Don't you guys have an anthrax-mailer you need to track down, too?

[Ilya the Recusant]

In a not so bright galaxy nowhere near intelligent space,

Post by Michael Hoye

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Don't you guys have an anthrax-mailer you need to track down, too?

And something about Afghanistan...


Ilya the Recusant
-----------------
"Asshole" has a special place in my childhood, the point at which I
first learned that typical Americans were assholes.
- C&J
----
www.livejournal.com/users/ohilya

[Dave Rothgery]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Almost certainly he's dead and we can't prove it. This has been true for
years.

[David Loewe, Jr.]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 16:55:47 GMT, Dave Rothgery

Post by Dave Rothgery

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Almost certainly he's dead and we can't prove it. This has been true for
years.

I used to think myself, but then more tapes came out. I do have an
idea how they could be faked, but I'd like to read your thoughts on
the subject.

[t***@rci.rogers.com]

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 16:55:47 GMT, Dave Rothgery

Post by Dave Rothgery

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Almost certainly he's dead and we can't prove it. This has been true for
years.

I used to think myself, but then more tapes came out. I do have an
idea how they could be faked, but I'd like to read your thoughts on
the subject.

I used to think that he was dead and that it was being kept secret. My
reason for thinking this was that if it was announced that he Bin Laden
had been killed, all of a sudden he is a martyr and every Tom, Dick and
Mohammed is out there blowing stuff up in his memory. The other reason
is that if he is still thought to be alive, he can still be used as a
poster boy for the hawks.

These thoughts and feelings are in the past tense because I just don't
know what to think anymore. Dead or alive...we may never know.

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 12:17:59 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr."

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
I used to think myself, but then more tapes came out. I do have an
idea how they could be faked, but I'd like to read your thoughts on
the subject.

Short of him doing the kidnapping thing and holding up a recent newspaper
with a readable headline, absolute confirmation that they weren't recorded
in advance is hard if not impossible. The tapes always seem to fairly
vague in their descriptions of what he's talking about, don't they?


Jasper

[Dave Rothgery]

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 16:55:47 GMT, Dave Rothgery

Post by Dave Rothgery

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Almost certainly he's dead and we can't prove it. This has been true for
years.

I used to think myself, but then more tapes came out. I do have an
idea how they could be faked, but I'd like to read your thoughts on
the subject.

My understanding (and I'm decidedly a non-expert on this) is that the
tapes aren't all that high quality; a good voice actor, a close relative
of Bin Laden's, or someone with very high-end audio editting equipment
could fake them without too much difficulty.

The basic point here was that on 9/11/2001 Bin Laden was neither young
nor healthy; living on the run, far from even a rudimentary hospital, in
a region that's bombed frequently is not going to be conducive to long-
term survival.

[David Loewe, Jr.]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 00:31:41 GMT, Dave Rothgery

Post by Dave Rothgery

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 16:55:47 GMT, Dave Rothgery

Post by Dave Rothgery

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Almost certainly he's dead and we can't prove it. This has been true for
years.

I used to think myself, but then more tapes came out. I do have an
idea how they could be faked, but I'd like to read your thoughts on
the subject.

My understanding (and I'm decidedly a non-expert on this) is that the
tapes aren't all that high quality; a good voice actor, a close relative
of Bin Laden's,

My personal "They are fakes" theory has to do with the fact (or so
I've heard) that Osama's oldest son sounds almost dead spot on like
his father.

Post by Dave Rothgery
or someone with very high-end audio editting equipment
could fake them without too much difficulty.
The basic point here was that on 9/11/2001 Bin Laden was neither young
nor healthy; living on the run, far from even a rudimentary hospital, in
a region that's bombed frequently is not going to be conducive to long-
term survival.

[Michael Hoye]

Post by David Loewe, Jr.
My personal "They are fakes" theory has to do with the fact (or so
I've heard) that Osama's oldest son sounds almost dead spot on like
his father.

That's interesting. I hadn't heard that, though it does sound reasonable.
On the other hand, I'd take the fact that there haven't been that many
recent pronouncements from him, if this is the case, as evidence that he's
still around.

[Matt Schroeder]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?

Because Pakistan does not want him caught, and Pakistan is a nuclear
power. This is not a particularly big mystery.

cheers,
matt.

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Richard Boye
Wounds. Should. Heal.
They should.
Why has the murderer not been caught, though?
Mister President, where is Osama bin Laden? Is he hiding under your
desk, oh so comically, with the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Nearly three thousand of my neighbors were murdered, four years ago, in
the heart of America, and we still await our justice. The hole is still
there.
Mister Bush, where is Osama bin Laden? Do you still care?

Well, Bush has been replaced by Obama , and Osama is still at large.