Re: OT: Physicians for a National Health Program

[Frank Olson <use_the_email_links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Edmund Fitzgerald wrote:

>> No.  But we do have guys the likes of the idiot that runs "Bountiful". We
>> have "nut jobs" like Koresh.  The "Christian Faith" has many
>> proponents, some of whose views are rather "extreme".  A Muslim fanatic
>> wouldn't hesitate to throw his life away (as long as he believed what he
>> was doing carried the "blessing" of Allah.  There are many similarities
>> between the "training camps" of someone like Bin Laden and Daniel Koresh
>> or any equally extremist "white power" group.  We do have a "different
>> morality" in North America as opposed to the middle east.  >
>
> Let me say it again.  Pure Horeshit.  There are no organizations of
> Christian crusaders running amuck all over the world beheading and blowing
> up whoever they please.

Actually there is an organization whose "head" professes to be
"Christian" that is running amok "blowing up" and killing whoever they
please (actually their focus is on some people they call "terrorists").
  They even carry a flag that looks exactly like yours.


> You and Rosie appear to have similar views vis a vie Christians being as big
> a threat as Muslim terrorists.

Rosie's obviously a "nut job".  There are many "Christian" criminals
that are/were as big a threat as Muslim terrorists (McVeigh is no longer
with us).


> I think if you would give her a fair chance
> she could probably convince you that George Bush really did blow up the
> World Trade Center buildings.

Bullshit.  Next you're going to tell us that it's impossible to roll a
Boeing 737.


>
>
> Where we make
>> the biggest mistake is trying to impose that same morality on a people
>> that simply don't understand it (or our way of life).
>
>
> If that's true then I suggest it's a bad idea for them to immigrate to our
> counties since it would be to difficult for them to adapt to our morality
> and laws because of their fundamental lack of understanding.

On the contrary, those that do decide to immigrate here are much more
moderate (and Western) in their views.  I have many Muslim friends and
customers.  They're extremely nice people and deeply committed to making
the community (as a whole) better.


>
>
>> They've *always* been using "big knives, guns, and bombs".
>
>
> With all the talk of your martial arts prowess I wasn't quite sure you had
> this understanding.

I understand what I read.


>  I know what I would do - I would not hesitate to kill a terriorist to save
> the lives of your family or any other innocents.  I understand we are in a
> global war with Islamic Jihadist.   And people are geting killed.  Not in
> great numbers as in our other wars, but this time no end is in sight.

Ah, yes...  the "war on terror".  I'm sorry to "burst your bubble", but
you can't make "war" on terrorism.  That's just the kind of thinking
that got the US into Iran.  Terrorism doesn't have a country or an
obvious physical characteristic.  It's a rather twisted philosophy.
Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist.  Jim Jones was one as well.  Your "war
on terror" is a catchy slogan, but all it means is that more of our
troops are being put in harms way and more innocent Iraqi and American
citizens are going to die.  How do you fight terrorism?  You obviously
can't reason with someone that thinks you're the embodiment of evil, so
what do you do?  I say, you get the heck away if you can't find or
neutralize the "head" of this snake.  Put some distance between you and
"them".


>>> If a co-conspritor of the phony Jihadists was in custody and it was
>>> understood he had information about your kidnapped family's whereabouts
>>> would you be willing to pour water over his face in an effort to save the
>>> lives your family?
>> I believe that there are means available to obtain this kind of
>> information that doesn't involve torture.  I certainly don't believe we
>> should be paying a murderer like Clifford Olson (no relation) so he
>> would lead the police to the bodies of his victims.
>>
>
> First off I've not convinced pouring water down someone's nose is torture.

Let's say it's not exactly the preferred method of interrogation and
leave it at that.



> Liberals, and perhaps yourself, tend to think anything that that makes
> someone the least bit uncomfortable is torture.

There you go again...  Thinking for me.  Now you're starting to argue
like Bass.


> Islamic Jihadist, as you
> may have noticed, behead their captives, mutilate their bodies, and hang
> them up on public display.

Terrorists do that.  If you want to call them "Islamic Jihadists" then
by all means do so.  Personally, I think any terrorist is pretty "sick"
and twisted by any standard.  If you have to make a point by
slaughtering innocents, you're not going to accomplish what you thought
(at least in my view).


> Liberals, for some reason, don't seem to
> consider what the Jihadists do to be torture, or at least you never hear one
> say so.

I think most "Liberals" view terrorism the same way we do.


>>> If you wouldn't, I'd be willing to do it for you.  Your kendo (thought
>>> that was a card game) is not going save your family under these
>>> circumstances.
>> I'm pretty handy with Bokken, Katana and Wakasachi.  Kendo is the "way of
>> the sword".
>>
>
> That's nice.  But you won't pour water down a terrorist's nose to save your
> family.

I don't know if that sort of "torture" would actually work.  People can
be "convinced" to say anything.  How would you know he was telling the
truth in time to properly intervene (or that you were even talking to
someone that knew enough) to "save" your family?  What I said was there
are methods available that are better than torture.  The problem is you
have to *know* exactly whom to use them on.  You'd also have to
"prejudge" someone as being "a terrorist".  In my country (and yours)
the Law states you're innocent until proven guilty.  And I would
hesitate to judge someone as "guilty by association".  Does the fact
that Brinks provides service to a known criminal organization make them
suspect as well?  Some here would think so, but it wouldn't stand in a
court of law.  :-)



>
> I see you went to great lengths not to answer the last two questions.
>
>


I'll answer them for you now.  There's something called "freedom of
religion" in both Canada, and the US.  There's also something called
"the Law" which is based on our own mores and jurisprudence.  When
"religious belief" goes against the Laws of the land, the Laws (and our
own mores) should win.  Not-with-standing, the Law in many Islamic
states is based on the Quran, so we have countries like Iran still
stoning women and treating them as subservient to men.  However, many
Islamic states are quite moderate in their views and more "western" in
their thinking.

It's the individuals you refer to as "Islamic Jihadists" that also take
a more literal view of the Quran.  I watched a rather interesting
interview of a Muslim cleric on the BBC the other day.  He was speaking
(lecturing actually) on a television program originally broadcast by Al
Jazira on the "proper way" to beat your wife.  Even though he advocated
not using anything that would "mark her", the thought of raising my hand
to someone I love is simply abhorrent to me.  You conveniently ignore
the fact that "Western thought" and "Eastern though" is about as far
apart geographically as it is philosophically.  This shouldn't preclude
(or even prevent) people from the East from immigrating to our country.
  I do believe that when they do make that choice, they have to live by
the laws and mores that prevail.  I don't think you'll find many
"Islamic Jihadists" living here.  I think they would find our culture
completely abhorrent.  Being an "Islamic Jihadist" is sort of like a
natural form of "immigration control".  :-)