We want to see the part where Clinton 'authorized regime change'
Please see this article about the Iraq Liberation Act, which specifically states:
"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime"
This act was signed into law by President Clinton on October 31, 1998, meaning he authorized a policy of regime change, defined as removal of Saddam Hussein.
Now, given that you've been shown in error about President Clinton and his authorization of regime change, I guess we can can consider you a liar as well? Since the standard appears to be that an error qualifies as a deliberate act of misleading people... Or so the standard seems to be in your accusation of lying about President Bush.
Well, to be honest, in the last 30 years we've only had one President impeached, and he wasn't convicted. A lot of the calls of illegal actions are hyperbole meant to either damage the person so attacked, sell more newspapers, or both...
The standard for libel for journalists is quite high, so it's pretty normal in the US for many journalistic "editorialists" to come from hyper-partisan sides of the political parties, and toss such accusations around with no fear of actual legal repercussions. Freedom of speech and all that...
What part of "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." do you not understand?
Define unreasonable. Please. Because apparently it hasn't been defined in relation to the current tempest-in-a-teacup surrounding this. As of today, it's not been settled, because there still isn't a court case about it.
Now, if you want to go and assert that it's illegal because YOU think so, then understand you're actually subverting the Constitution and the Rule of Law as set down by the founding fathers...
Well of course, because he's an evil republican and believes in God and stuff so he can't be trusted.
I just want to say I really REALLY appreciate your handling of this; your responses are well-thought out, well written, complete, and rational. The calls for impeachment, the screams of illegal wiretaps are completely overblown because - as far as I know - we still do NOT have a trial concerning these issues, and there's zero proof the President did anything that would count as a High Crime or Misdemeanor.
Impeach him for what? Seriously, I want to know. Because last I heard was that a solitary judge in Detroit ruled the case could go forward, but no trial has been conducted, no verdict reached, no sentence handed down.
So I think impeachment is a bit premature at this point...
Even beyond that, I'm not sure I see anything novel over the Samsung Anycall i718. Video, music, monster dynamic touchscreen, bluetooth, PDA functionality. Except the i718 has buttons on the very bottom for the most common functions, a very smart move...
There's this solution for people JUST LIKE YOU. It's called a "rental store". This is a physical place - actual brick and mortar as we l33t types call them - where you can walk in, look at what you want (they call it browsing, but no web browser is used), and then for $3-$4, walk OUT with the movie you selected, to watch any time - and as MANY times as - you want over the next 3-5 days.
Best of all, many of those other stores - the ones where you get your Mountain Dew and Skittles - carry such options, too! Imagine - you can pay $3 to see the movie you want, and only do it when you want to!
When your average factory worker in Germany makes 15 EUR/hour, and your average factory worker in China, India, or Morocco makes 0.5 EUR/hour, it's going to take a MASSIVE spike in energy costs to even out that equation. Even a 10X increase in power won't make it equal.
Buy a few thousand feet of 1/0 gauge wire. Loop it around the inside of the foundation a few dozen times, and connect to the main incoming power. Instant broadcast power! I don't know that I'd want to live inside the house, but being able to walk in and simply turn the equipment ON without plugging in would be pretty geeky.
That and the prehensile tail you may grow after a few years of living there...
And those we're fighting are not wearing a uniform. So your non-sequitur about Iraq and Afghanistan signing the Geneva conventions still don't address the question.
You're such a fascinating moron...
And I'm the one being sleazy. The sign of intellectual bankruptcy is namecalling.
Doesn't being so stupid a handicap in your everyday life ?
Your grammar in that sentence pretty much answers the question...
OK, so how did the enemy combatants meet the definition of soldier, according to the Geneva conventions? And if they're not soldiers, they cannot meet the Geneva conventions definition of prisoners of war.
Additionally, those we're fighting NEVER signed the Geneva conventions, meaning they forfeit their rights to protections of the Geneva conventions. That's in the actual text of the Geneva conventions themselves. Both sides have to play by the rules or it doesn't apply. Given that one side doesn't wear uniforms, uses protected sites like churches, schools, and hospitals as staging grounds, attempts to use the general population as cover, and does not abide by the Geneva conventions pretty much guarantee they don't apply...
You know, my oven is really well insulated, but it doesn't actually heat until power is put IN to the system. it's the power into the system that's the issue...
Power into the system is important, no? Watts - power - is heat. We're putting heat into the system, so is the Sun. It just happens to do about 3-4 times MORE than we put in...
Wonderful. Then if the Sun, who's increased output ALONE dwarfs all of mankind's electricity consumption, isn't the source of global warming, then how can man be responsible for it? Remember, the numbers are really pretty cut-and-dried - the Sun's increase over the last 30 years provides more than 3 times mankind's use of electricity. If we're a problem, then the Sun must be a whole HECK of a lot bigger issue.
Conversely, if the Sun is NOT an issue, than a source that's only 1/3rd its level shouldn't be an issue, either.
Unless, of course, the whole global warming thing is really about politics and social control, not the environment...
I think you're letting your politics blind you... President Bush and his administration are quite rational; and in fact are CONTINUING the same rational conclusion started with President Clinton and the rejection of Kyoto during his administration.
Unless of course you consider President Clinton - and his Vice President, Al Gore - not rational either? The change in position of Al Gore alone should be troubling - from an administration AND party (remember the unanimous vote in the Senate, meaning all 45 democrats as well) opposed to Kyoto's passage, and no excoriating the present administration for not signing the treaty. Yeah, there's no politics there...
Then let's put out energy and resources into dealing with the effects of climate change, because we sure as heck can't stop it. We've had ice ages and recoveries in the past - less than 15,000 years ago even - without "man" driving it.
Rather than spending trillions on efforts that WON'T stop climate change, let's spend that money on simply learning how to live with a changing climate. If cities have to move as the seas rise, then we creep them away from the rising seas (note that it would take - even at the fastest UN estimate - around 600 years for Miami to be submerged. We should be able to rationally migrate that city to higher ground over that time, for a pretty small investme
Civilization won't collapse, because climate change ISN'T instantaneous. It happens over time. Ask the Dutch about the new lands they've added over the last 100 years. Seems they added a LOT of property in a short time, in a scale of time a LOT shorter than the calamity many of the AGW Chicken Littles are shouting about. And about the same effort.
Alarmists are the biggest problem with climate change - they're simply not realistic about the scale or timeline of the problem. We're talking centuries for changes to become an issue, so we have a bit of time to address them logically and methodically.
You know, 800 years ago it was really warm in Europe, grapes grew in England. Then it got cold over 100 years. Did civilization collapse? If medieval man could handle it, I think we can handle it too...
OK, so the Sun's output change doesn't affect the climate. And that output change is 3 TIMES our total consumption of electricity, and of course that DOES affect the climate?
It's called scale. If you think our use of energy is driving climate change, then you should have the intellectual honesty to admit that the Sun - which is now putting a LOT more energy into the world than it did 30 years ago - is a HUGE contributor.
If you discount the Sun, then to be intellectually honest, you have to discount man because we're considerably less than the Sun.
What's driving climate change? Dunno, what drove the ice ages and recoveries in the past? Sure as heck wasn't my neighbor's Excursion or the fact that I stil have some incandescent lightbulbs...
And that would exactly defeat one of the strongest pillars of the US system - having fixed times between elections means that you can focus on longer-term goals, rather than the current polling data. Knowing that you can implement policy that may not be popular right now but will be beneficial in 2-3 years is what allows the legislative and executive branches to think further out than 2 months...
Slashdot Mirror
Please see this article about the Iraq Liberation Act, which specifically states:
"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime"
This act was signed into law by President Clinton on October 31, 1998, meaning he authorized a policy of regime change, defined as removal of Saddam Hussein.
Now, given that you've been shown in error about President Clinton and his authorization of regime change, I guess we can can consider you a liar as well? Since the standard appears to be that an error qualifies as a deliberate act of misleading people... Or so the standard seems to be in your accusation of lying about President Bush.
Per the US Constitution, foreign treaties are the domain of the Executive and the Senate; Senators Sparkman and McGovern fall in the latter category.
Speaker Pelosi, as a member of the House, does not.
The standard for libel for journalists is quite high, so it's pretty normal in the US for many journalistic "editorialists" to come from hyper-partisan sides of the political parties, and toss such accusations around with no fear of actual legal repercussions. Freedom of speech and all that...
Define unreasonable. Please. Because apparently it hasn't been defined in relation to the current tempest-in-a-teacup surrounding this. As of today, it's not been settled, because there still isn't a court case about it.
Now, if you want to go and assert that it's illegal because YOU think so, then understand you're actually subverting the Constitution and the Rule of Law as set down by the founding fathers...
I just want to say I really REALLY appreciate your handling of this; your responses are well-thought out, well written, complete, and rational. The calls for impeachment, the screams of illegal wiretaps are completely overblown because - as far as I know - we still do NOT have a trial concerning these issues, and there's zero proof the President did anything that would count as a High Crime or Misdemeanor.
So I think impeachment is a bit premature at this point...
Oh, and love your sig...:)
Even beyond that, I'm not sure I see anything novel over the Samsung Anycall i718. Video, music, monster dynamic touchscreen, bluetooth, PDA functionality. Except the i718 has buttons on the very bottom for the most common functions, a very smart move...
Best of all, many of those other stores - the ones where you get your Mountain Dew and Skittles - carry such options, too! Imagine - you can pay $3 to see the movie you want, and only do it when you want to!
When your average factory worker in Germany makes 15 EUR/hour, and your average factory worker in China, India, or Morocco makes 0.5 EUR/hour, it's going to take a MASSIVE spike in energy costs to even out that equation. Even a 10X increase in power won't make it equal.
Thank God for Luxembourg!
RTFA! It's a GENERATOR, not the Internet... Tubes don't play any role here...
That and the prehensile tail you may grow after a few years of living there...
Get your SI units right... That's 50 bazillion.
You're such a fascinating moron...
And I'm the one being sleazy. The sign of intellectual bankruptcy is namecalling.
Doesn't being so stupid a handicap in your everyday life ?
Your grammar in that sentence pretty much answers the question...
Additionally, those we're fighting NEVER signed the Geneva conventions, meaning they forfeit their rights to protections of the Geneva conventions. That's in the actual text of the Geneva conventions themselves. Both sides have to play by the rules or it doesn't apply. Given that one side doesn't wear uniforms, uses protected sites like churches, schools, and hospitals as staging grounds, attempts to use the general population as cover, and does not abide by the Geneva conventions pretty much guarantee they don't apply...
You know, my oven is really well insulated, but it doesn't actually heat until power is put IN to the system. it's the power into the system that's the issue...
Excuse me, but what part of the Geneva Conventions has the US not followed?
Power into the system is important, no? Watts - power - is heat. We're putting heat into the system, so is the Sun. It just happens to do about 3-4 times MORE than we put in...
Conversely, if the Sun is NOT an issue, than a source that's only 1/3rd its level shouldn't be an issue, either.
Unless, of course, the whole global warming thing is really about politics and social control, not the environment...
Unless of course you consider President Clinton - and his Vice President, Al Gore - not rational either? The change in position of Al Gore alone should be troubling - from an administration AND party (remember the unanimous vote in the Senate, meaning all 45 democrats as well) opposed to Kyoto's passage, and no excoriating the present administration for not signing the treaty. Yeah, there's no politics there...
Rather than spending trillions on efforts that WON'T stop climate change, let's spend that money on simply learning how to live with a changing climate. If cities have to move as the seas rise, then we creep them away from the rising seas (note that it would take - even at the fastest UN estimate - around 600 years for Miami to be submerged. We should be able to rationally migrate that city to higher ground over that time, for a pretty small investme
Civilization won't collapse, because climate change ISN'T instantaneous. It happens over time. Ask the Dutch about the new lands they've added over the last 100 years. Seems they added a LOT of property in a short time, in a scale of time a LOT shorter than the calamity many of the AGW Chicken Littles are shouting about. And about the same effort.
Alarmists are the biggest problem with climate change - they're simply not realistic about the scale or timeline of the problem. We're talking centuries for changes to become an issue, so we have a bit of time to address them logically and methodically.
You know, 800 years ago it was really warm in Europe, grapes grew in England. Then it got cold over 100 years. Did civilization collapse? If medieval man could handle it, I think we can handle it too...
It's called scale. If you think our use of energy is driving climate change, then you should have the intellectual honesty to admit that the Sun - which is now putting a LOT more energy into the world than it did 30 years ago - is a HUGE contributor.
If you discount the Sun, then to be intellectually honest, you have to discount man because we're considerably less than the Sun.
What's driving climate change? Dunno, what drove the ice ages and recoveries in the past? Sure as heck wasn't my neighbor's Excursion or the fact that I stil have some incandescent lightbulbs...
OK, and if AGW is shown to be wrong can we sue the rest of the world for trillions in punative damages?
And that would exactly defeat one of the strongest pillars of the US system - having fixed times between elections means that you can focus on longer-term goals, rather than the current polling data. Knowing that you can implement policy that may not be popular right now but will be beneficial in 2-3 years is what allows the legislative and executive branches to think further out than 2 months...