One More Question

[Anonymous Poster]

I also saw a sentence attributed to George W Bush that basically used the word 'SUSPECT' and 'DEAD OR ALIVE'.

If this is a criminal proceeding and he is a suspect, shouldn't you hold off on the DEAD part? If they are sure, (DEAD SURE, no pun intended) why is the word "SUSPECT" still being used?

My feelings are that those responsible should be slowly fed through a coffee grinder, allowed to heal then pushed in again, but the use of SUSPECT and DEAD is making me wonder. And he's making statements about not going off on other people that either are from the Mid East or consider Islam their religion...? A good thought, but seems a bit disingenious with his DEAD & SUSPECT statement.

If it is not a criminal proceeding but a "War" or "Military" proceeding, the Dead statement still seems out of line.

These attacks on other Muslims in this country remind me of statements made after the OKC bombing. And that was one of "our" fair haired lot. People look back at the internment of anyone of Asian heritage in WWII with some shock. Fifty years hasn't improved that idea among some of the population. Hope the percentage is small.

Unfortunately if someone with green skin and 3 eyes kills your family you are probably going to look at other green skinned 3 eyed people with some caution. Maybe just human nature?

And does anyone but me feel with the uncertainty and fragility of life, that having a job makes no sense, such a waste of time, that a better use of time would be to jump on the tractor and grow some crops?

del...

 

[cowboydoc]

del,
I think it's just nature period to be wary of something not your color. NOW I AM NOT PROMOTING ANY KIND OF RACISM JUST AN OBSERVATION. If you put in an odd colored horse or cow with an already est. herd of similiar color alot of times the herd will shun the off colored animal as well. If you put in a like colored animal this rarely happens. I think it's just part of nature to be wary of those that are not like yourself.

 

[JATO_RaT]

Perhaps the dead part can be partially attributed to his previously well documented bombings of the WTC, the embassies in South Africa and the linking of his people on the Cole. At any rate, hes responsible for many, many deaths of innocent people without the WTC. Rat...

 

[Bird]

Semantics, del. It makes no difference how absolutely positive you are that someone commited a crime, in criminal cases, the perpetrator is always a "suspect" until convicted in a court of law. Remember "innocent until proven guilty"? And that means in court; no matter how positively proven guilty elsewhere.

And "war"? Well, that word is used for lots of things. Right now I guess a lot of people think of it as a war with one nation against another, but how about the "drug war", "war on crime", or "war on (you name it)".

Of course, nowadays we don't often hear the "Wanted Dead or Alive" like we did in the western movies./w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif So maybe that bothers some folks, but not me.

Bird

 

[JATO_RaT]

Bird, funny you mention semantics. The first thought through my head when I read Dels remark was "it depends on what the definition of what 'wanted' is, and of course what the definition of 'or' is and then finally it depends on your interpertation of what 'dead' and 'alive' is".

 

[Anonymous Poster]

If they have the evidence to prove it, I just think he shouldn't be a "suspect" anymore, and although my own personal,working man feelings say go shred the guy, I just feel uncomfortable hearing the President say it, sometimes he sounds more like a guy on the next stool over from me (or is that the next tractor seat over?).

Something like a high school football coach at halftime. I don't think he should be talking about it everyday in such terms.

He seems to be kind of smiling when he's talking about it sometimes. Whenever I see that smirk I just think of the Marine being drug through the city streets in Africa (1998?) and the death of all the servicemen in Iran trying to get the hostages out. I feel what's coming is not going to be what anyone wants to be smiling about.

del

 

[Bird]

<font color=blue>I feel what's coming is not going to be what anyone wants to be smiling about.</font color=blue>

I'll sure agree with that!

Bird

 

[MDNY]

If this is going to be a WAR, then why isn't terrorism considered (1) a federal crime and a capital offense at that. (2) this should be heard by a military tribunal, not some public court of opinion or judicial system. He should be considered a WAR CRIMINAL. Why? He is fighting a War against the U.S. so it makes sense to try him as a war criminal. I believe he US Military will certainly give him a far worse punishment than the civilian courts will.

One last thing: Who is gonna defend him? Johnny Cochran? He is always looking to show the glove didn't fit, so you can't commit. But seriously, who is going to take this case and be willing to risk it all for a terrorist?

 

[RPM]

The 'authorities' probably have material evidence that directly links ***** bin Laden's network (if not him directly) to the event. Who knows what that might comprise - they are touchy about revealing intelligence methods for obvious reasons. I'm sure, however, that a good team of analysts and one of the cold-war spy satellites could gather a lot of useful information over Afghanistan.

Who knows what new techniques they have developed for monitoring activities and correlating various pieces of information.

Oh well, better go, I think that's a black helicopter hovering over my house again!

Patrick

 

[MDNY]

I always love the fact that the "NEWS AGENCIES" feel it is their right and obligation to report stuff maybe they shouldn't. Like the fact that we could intercept Bin Laden's satalite phone. After they did that he went internet and with encryption and the billions of web pages we can't find squat. Thank you the world of news reporting.