Australia predicts China passes US by 2015

[TRCSF]

Normally I would agree with you. Then I saw the photo's of Cindy Sheehan prepping for the media and posing setting up a pose and grieving for the cameras. Her and Casey's own family members are denouncing her personal use of his death for her own political motives.

Lol, he's a grown man with access to the same information as you. Actually, with access to more information then you as he had already been to Iraq once and chose to return. One thing he was NOT was an innocent child who doesn't understand evil men offer you candy from dark vans to do bad things to you. Spare me the hyperbole. He was a hero, who knowingly risked his life for something he believed strongly to be the right and moral thing to do.

Yes, Sheehan is doing interviews. She's also lost her son. Her grief is sincere and for you or anybody else to pretend otherwise is just plain disgusting.

As for reenlisting, it can hardly be said that Casey Sheehan had much choice in the matter given the stop loss. He was lied to about the war and is life was wasted and thrown away by people who, obviously, don't care.

 

[kat]

Yes, Sheehan is doing interviews. She's also lost her son. Her grief is sincere and for you or anybody else to pretend otherwise is just plain disgusting.

..yes, all the grief laden parents I know spend time in makeup and pose for cameras..crying on command. No pretending needed. Even her family agrees.

As for reenlisting, it can hardly be said that Casey Sheehan had much choice in the matter given the stop loss. He was lied to about the war and is life was wasted and thrown away by people who, obviously, don't care.

stop loss didn't send Casey Sheehan on the volunteer mission that he that he volunteer to take part in and was killed participating in. Nor was he a victim of any "stop loss" but you're welcome to try to prove your statement if you'd like.

 

[TRCSF]

..yes, all the grief laden parents I know spend time in makeup and pose for cameras..crying on command. No pretending needed. Even her family agrees.

stop loss didn't send Casey Sheehan on the volunteer mission that he that he volunteer to take part in and was killed participating in. Nor was he a victim of any "stop loss" but you're welcome to try to prove your statement if you'd like.

What grief laden parents should be doing is demanding answers for why their kids had to die for no good reason. Again, you're just a conservative making a partisan attack on a woman who's lost her son. Makes me sick.

As for Casey, he had two choices. Reenlist and get the reenlistment bonus, or get called back via stop loss and get no bonus. To call him a volunteer is a sick joke.

 

[kat]

Talking points! talking points! get your talking points!

Be real, this is a volunteer army. Casey was a hero who VOLUNTEERED for a dangerous mission. Stop trying to undermine his heroism.

 

[kat]

oh..yes..a little informative tidbit..mothers who suffer the death of their children do not suddenly become beyond reproach for unlimited amounts of time and for actions that go beyond...simple grief, particularly when they voluntarily become political hacks.

 

[Archon]

I'm sorry, I need some clarification from you. Are you saying that...he didn't re-enlist? are you saying she supported his re-enlistment? or she doesn't know if she did?

I'm saying that she isn't talking about her son at all. She said that she would have taken her son to Canada had she known what she does now.

Which "second" statement is of personal beliefs"? are you really saying personal beliefs are true...if you believe them to be?

The statement that she wouldn't have supported his re-enlistment (to the point of taking him to Canada). A certain kind of personal belief is true if you say it is, because you are responsible for defining it. For instance, if I say, "I like the color blue," then it is true because I believe it and because I say it is. Nobody can tell me otherwise. The situation is similar here.

I didn't read " if I would have known that before my son was killed, I would have taken him to Canada. I would never have let him go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have" as I would have "tried" to stop him, but that she would have stopped him...definatively. Further more it seems to ignore the fact that her son was a grown man who made an educated decision based on experience. If anyone has the opportunity to judge whether their actions in Iraq are worth dying for...it's someone who's been there and then...volunteers to re-enlist and go back. More so then someone who's based their beliefs and opinions on what Iraq is about on the left slanted msm news or someone who has taken in by the propaganda of the lefts talking points hook, line and sinker.

So you're proposing that we ask her dead son?

The problem with calling what she has done propaganda is that she isn't trying to imply that she knows better than her son about conditions in Iraq. She says that she, personally, would have prevented him from re-enlisting had she had a more complete knowledge of the situation. She isn't saying that her son wouldn't have re-enlisted.

Also, she appears to be suggesting that she was not against his going before the war started..and my understanding is that she's held this stance prior to the Iraq war and prior to her son being sent to Iraq, the first time.

Nowhere does she say (or even imply) that she wasn't against the war when it first began. She says that had she known that "9/11 was their Pearl Harbor to get their neo-con agenda through," she would have stopped her son from re-enlisting.

 

[TRCSF]

Talking points! talking points! get your talking points!

The talking points is the brain dead arguments coming from right wing talkshow hosts about how Cindy Sheehan is just posing for the camera and doing it for self promotion, how some distant family members don't like what she's doing (as if that's somehow relevant) and how Casey Sheehan volunteered and therefore it's OK that he died for no good reason.

I means it's right out of the script.

 

[Skyhunter]

Talking points! talking points! get your talking points!

Be real, this is a volunteer army. Casey was a hero who VOLUNTEERED for a dangerous mission. Stop trying to undermine his heroism.

One of the soldiers in his unit talked to Cindy, and told her how much he was liked by everyone. He said that Casey didn't want to go on that mission, but decided to go because of the comraderie he had with the soldiers of his unit.

He was a hero.

And how do the right wingers honer his service?

By smearing his mother.

Shame on you!

[edit]

What Noble Cause Did Casey Sheehan Die For?
"Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation. No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam."
- Iraqi Constitution supported by Iran-backed Shiites and the Bush Administration (but opposed by Sunni leaders)

Care to try and spin that one Kat?

 

[1123581321]

Errr... what was this thread about? It seems to have been well and truly hijacked. I was interested in the original topic and wonder if anyone wants to get back to that discussion?

nope, its not coming back.

 

[1123581321]

[edit]


Care to try and spin that one Kat?

Just like christianity was the majorly accepted religon of the US before it was attacked by the liberals and the bible/ten commandments were/are a guide for legeslation.
You represent the party that says it accepts everyone, the party that defends the koran because of the rights of Americans who practice Islam, and attacks the bible because you say it offends Muslims, so what is wrong with Islam being the religion of state in Iraq? For the most part, the Koran provides a good moral guideline for Muslims, it is extremests who mis-interpret it and kill.

Edit: is it because you say bush supports it that it is wrong?
Edit: the sunnis are the minority, so they don't have as much power.


Fibonacci

 

[Skyhunter]

Just like christianity was the majorly accepted religon of the US before it was attacked by the liberals and the bible/ten commandments were/are a guide for legeslation.
You represent the party that says it accepts everyone, the party that defends the koran because of the rights of Americans who practice Islam, and attacks the bible because you say it offends Muslims, so what is wrong with Islam being the religion of state in Iraq? For the most part, the Koran provides a good moral guideline for Muslims, it is extremests who mis-interpret it and kill.

Edit: is it because you say bush supports it that it is wrong?
Edit: the sunnis are the minority, so they don't have as much power.


Fibonacci

I think you make way to many assumptions and ask loaded questions.

 

[outsider]

Just like christianity was the majorly accepted religon of the US before it was attacked by the liberals and the bible/ten commandments were/are a guide for legeslation.
You represent the party that says it accepts everyone, the party that defends the koran because of the rights of Americans who practice Islam, and attacks the bible because you say it offends Muslims, so what is wrong with Islam being the religion of state in Iraq? For the most part, the Koran provides a good moral guideline for Muslims, it is extremests who mis-interpret it and kill.

Edit: is it because you say bush supports it that it is wrong?
Edit: the sunnis are the minority, so they don't have as much power.


Fibonacci

First of all, Skyhunter asked Kat to spin it... you are not kat... Second of all, whatever you just said makes little sense to the discussion of which you were trying to continue on behalf of kat... 3rd, it's not a matter of opposing what Bush does... if he did something right, I would support it.

 

[Smurf]

[edit]


Care to try and spin that one Kat?

People keep bringing that up. Frankly I really don't see anything especially or extraordinarily wrong with using Islam for a basis of a constitution.

 

[Skyhunter]

People keep bringing that up. Frankly I really don't see anything especially or extraordinarily wrong with using Islam for a basis of a constitution.

You are not a woman I guess.

The role of women in Islam
Main article: women in Islam

Islam does not prohibit women from working, but emphasizes the importance of caring for house and family for both parents. Traditionally men have been able to prevent their wives from working by forbidding them to leave the house. In theory, Islamic law allows men to divorce at will, by saying "I divorce you" three times in public. In practice divorce is more involved than this and there may be separate state proceedings to follow as well. This practice is valid within most of the Muslim world today. Usually, the divorced wife keeps her dowry from when she was married, if there was one, and is given child support until the age of weaning, at which point the child may be returned to its father. There are only two ways of getting a divorce for women. In the case of a khü divorce a woman can give her husband a sum of money in exchange for him divorcing her. There is no minimum or maximum amount set for this form of divorce. In some schools of Islamic law a woman can petition a qadi for a divorce if her husband has abandoned her or is unfit to fulfill his duties as a husband.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#The_role_of_women_in_Islam

In practice it does not necessarily mean that Muslim nations are any worse than Christian nations. However slavery is not forbidden in the old testament and there are a number of practices in Leviticus that I would not like to see part of the law of the land. The problem is the constitution of Iraq is calling for Islamic law to be the law of the land, and that means the chief adjudicators of the law will not be judges, they will be clerics.

 

[Smurf]

But none of that is required by Islam, it's all just traditions that, even without islam, could very well have been sources for legislation. Besides, have you read the Iraqi constitution? It's as good as ours.

All Iraqis are equal in their rights without regard to gender, sect, opinion, belief, nationality, religion, or origin, and they are equal before the law. Discrimination against an Iraqi citizen on the basis of his gender, nationality, religion, or origin is prohibited. Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the security of his person. No one may be deprived of his life or liberty, except in accordance with legal procedures. All are equal before the courts.

I still see nothing wrong with using Islam except for a bit of fear mongering that it's going to turn into a tyrannical women-oppressing regime. Which I've heard no support for at all.

What we should really be worried about is all the federalist aspects.

 

[Skyhunter]

But none of that is required by Islam, it's all just traditions that, even without islam, could very well have been sources for legislation. Besides, have you read the Iraqi constitution? It's as good as ours.

I still see nothing wrong with using Islam except for a bit of fear mongering that it's going to turn into a tyrannical women-oppressing regime. Which I've heard no support for at all.

What we should really be worried about is all the federalist aspects.

The federalist aspect is probably what is going to doom it.

But the constitution itself does not necessarily guarantee anything.

Article 15.

(A) No civil law shall have retroactive effect unless the law so stipulates. There shall be neither a crime, nor punishment, except by law in effect at the time the crime is committed.

B) Police, investigators, or other governmental authorities may not violate the sanctity of private residences, whether these authorities belong to the federal or regional governments, governorates, municipalities, or local administrations, unless a judge or investigating magistrate has issued a search warrant in accordance with applicable law on the basis of information provided by a sworn individual who knew that bearing false witness would render him liable to punishment. Extreme exigent circumstances, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, may justify a warrantless search, but such exigencies shall be narrowly construed. In the event that a warrantless search is carried out in the absence of an extreme exigent circumstance, the evidence so seized, and any other evidence found derivatively from such search, shall be inadmissible in connection with a criminal charge, unless the court determines that the person who carried out the warrantless search believed reasonably and in good faith that the search was in accordance with the law.

(C) No one may be unlawfully arrested or detained, and no one may be detained by reason of political or religious beliefs.

(D) All persons shall be guaranteed the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, regardless of whether the proceeding is civil or criminal. Notice of the proceeding and its legal basis must be provided to the accused without delay.

(E) The accused is innocent until proven guilty pursuant to law, and he likewise has the right to engage independent and competent counsel, to remain silent in response to questions addressed to him with no compulsion to testify for any reason, to participate in preparing his defense, and to summon and examine witnesses or to ask the judge to do so. At the time a person is arrested, he must be notified of these rights.

(F) The right to a fair, speedy, and open trial shall be guaranteed.

(G) Every person deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall have the right of recourse to a court to determine the legality of his arrest or detention without delay and to order his release if this occurred in an illegal manner.

(H) After being found innocent of a charge, an accused may not be tried once again on the same charge.

(I) Civilians may not be tried before a military tribunal. Special or exceptional courts may not be established.

(J) Torture in all its forms, physical or mental, shall be prohibited under all circumstances, as shall be cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. No confession made under compulsion, torture, or threat thereof shall be relied upon or admitted into evidence for any reason in any proceeding, whether criminal or otherwise.

Doesn't our own constitution prohibit these practices?

Article 7.

A) Islam is the official religion of the State and is to be considered a source of legislation. No law that contradicts the universally agreed tenets of Islam, the principles of democracy, or the rights cited in Chapter Two of this Law may be enacted during the transitional period. This Law respects the Islamic identity of the majority of the Iraqi people and guarantees the full religious rights of all individuals to freedom of religious belief and practice.

(B) Iraq is a country of many nationalities, and the Arab people in Iraq are an inseparable part of the Arab nation.

My Persian friends thought like you did about Islamic law, when they were ousting the Shah of Iran. After they won the revolution they had to flee the country.

It sounds good but how will it work in practice, in this part of the world.

Do you know why Islam has so many ritual prayers?

Their society was patriarchal and very cruel. The men had all the power were brutal and hot-headed. These are people who survive and thrive in a desert, they were fierce. Muhammad showed them a way to peace. He was practical and knew that if he had calming rituals it would curb the violent tendencies of the men. The women remember what it was like and their greatest fear is that this jihad with America will throw their society back to the times before Mohammad