"Palme D'Or" for Mike Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11&

[kandrathe]

Sorry but if you are right about bad intel, then my point of Bush not knowing "that they have them and where they are"(which he claimed) is absolutely correct, is it not?

You are attempting to have this both ways. You are saying he was either wrong, or he lied. To me it is obvious that they "thought" they had some good intelligence before the war, but during the foggy after math it was not so clear they had it. In fact, as it turns out they didn't. We are in the realm of politics where the veracity of statements is based on intent, rather than fact. As in "Read my lips, no new taxes." There is a third possibility which is that the intelligence was right at one point, but wrong by the time they got to those places.

My point is that the circumstances that led to the Second Amendment no longer exist. This does not however mean that you can not stick with the "Guns for all" attitude but I think it is foolish to base this on the second ammendment instead of the current situation.

I think you miss the point of the intent of the founders of America. They believe that the people en masse are sovereign over the State, as in "Of the People, by the People, for the People". The 2nd amendments intent is to make the statement that "The People" are in charge. In my interpretation, each citizen is responsible for defending the nation and the integrity of the Republic. The tyrant of 2005 could be Bush or Kerry for all I know. The point I'm trying to make is that if you disarm the populace, then it is easier for the State to enforce its will upon the People.

Exactly my point, it was attempted numerous times to times to verify the votes. This was done by the Democrates and was stopped each time by the Republicans. This leaves the pure fact that not all votes were verified thus the result remains questionable.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy that argument. Any analysis of post election voting shows that depending on the equipment there is alway a small percentage of votes that do not get accurately counted, everywhere in the entire US. These people in a few democratic counties were down to looking at each errant voting card (under votes and over votes), and trying to deduce who the voter might have intended to vote for. Then you must trust that the voting judge read the tea leaves correctly. Why should 4 primarily democratic counties in only Florida be the only places where "ALL" votes cast are attempted to be counted. Everywhere else in the US, under votes and over votes were just tossed. To me, this was a blatant attempt to skew the outcome to one sides favor.

It is just the political correct term for someone being imprisoned without a trial and without the need for any evidence and no human rights.

I'm sorry but I disagree. We went to war against Afghanistan and the Taliban. Most the the people locked up are either non-Afghani fighters from that conflict, or Taliban leaders.

Nevermind, please with all due respect, would you please explain the difference between the way those prisoners in Gitmo are "interrogated" and torture?

I work with a guy who was in military intelligence during the Vietnam war. One story he told was of a South Vietnamese "Interrogator" was that this guy kept a number of straight pins under his lapel. He would ask all the Americans to leave the room, and then he would insert the pins under the fingernails of the victim. He would ask a question, and if he did not get an answer, or the wrong answer he would merely tap one of the pins with his pen. That is torture. In Singapore, and I've heard of this being done in Saudi Arabia if I recall correctly, the victim is placed kneeling with a rod behind their knees, then pushed back and bound such that slowly over time their knees become disjointed. That is torture. There are many more I've heard of that are even more sadistic and gruesome. Being forced to endure without sleep or stand with a hood on naked for hours is unkind, and humiliating and should not be condoned. But it is a far cry from torture. I'm not talking about the abuse which is being prosecuted, just the approved stuff.

What I think is a hoax is the way this "Alert" was presented to the public; as a result of new information and a present danger.

Lets think of it this way. I am a police officer and I discover a plot to murder you, but the information is a few years old. The suspects location is unknown. Do you want to know that information? Would I not be negligent if you were then murdered and it was discovered that I knew about the plot, but did nothing to alert you or protect you?