Re: OT: Physicians for a National Health Program

[Frank Olson <use_the_email_links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Edmund Fitzgerald wrote:

> [....]
>> How do you "stop" someone from doing this?  How do you stop someone like
>> "Robert Pickton", "Bill Gacy", "Charles Manson"?  Timothy McVeigh?
>
>
> Here's how you "stop" them.  First you apprehend them.  Then you give them a
> fair trial.  Then you give them due process under law.  Then you execute
> them.

Fair comment.  You've apprehended a number of them.  I don't see
anything happening "trial wise" (fair or unfair), and the "due process"
certainly isn't "proceeding".



>
> That brings them to a dead stop.

Check.


>
> I've never heard of Pickton.  And I didn't bother to Google him.

Willy Pickton was just convicted in a New Westminster Court of murdering
six women.  He bragged that the cops nailed him too soon.  He'd actually
  "done" 49 and wanted to finish with 50.  The remains of over twenty of
his victims were recovered from his pig farm.  He'd apparently butchered
the women, fed some of their parts to the pigs and delivered the rest to
a local rendering plant.  Google "Missing Women in Vancouver".


> But John
> Wayne Gacy was a serial killer [1970's] called the clown killer.  Manson
> ordered [1960's] his "family" of misfits to kill people for kicks and to
> prove their loyalty to him.

Not much different from what Bin Laden did, eh?


> McVeigh [1990's] was pissed off at the ATF and
> Janet Reno for what they did to Koresh..  As the liberals would say, he
> expressed his anger inappropriately.  Got the chair for it too.

Actually he was executed by lethal injection.  Gacy got "the chair".


>
> I hope you aren't trying to equate these individuals to al Qaeda.

Nope.  Not all of them.  I figure the closest to Bin Laden would be
Manson.  McVeigh acted pretty much alone (formulated his own terrorist
plot).


> If so you
> are either oblivious to reality or just grasping at straws.

I'm trying to make a point.  Read my question again.


> Unlawful
> combatants aren't arrested by cops, read their rights, given lawyers, with
> trials by their peers, and due process of law through the US court system..

I remember the US Government complaining about the treatment of the
American soldiers taken prisoner by the Viet Cong.  The Viet Cong
considered them "unlawful combatants" too and as such didn't accord them
the rights as prisoners under the Geneva Convention.  It's interesting
how what goes around comes around, isn't it??  I think the US should be
setting an example for humane and just treatment of prisoners of war and
"non-combatants".  Instead, we have people held incognito, without
charge, and without representation.  And they're probably being tortured
to boot.  That just plain *sucks*.


>
>>
>
>> Who's the "enemy"?  How do you positively identify them?
>>
>
> You ought to at least know the enemy by name by now.
> Islamic Jihadist/Terrorist (as you prefer).

I know twenty enemies by name and picture.  Bin Laden's the only one
still alive.  The other nineteen immolated themselves when they crashed
their hijacked jets.  I have no other identifiable enemies and neither
do you.


>
>  Individual identification can be difficult because as you have so astutely
> pointed out they do not wear "identifiable uniforms" plus they hide behind
> civilians.

They ARE civilians.  There's not a soldier amongst them.


> For this reason it would behoove the "good" Muslims to root the
> Islamic Jihadist/Terrorist out from their midst to avoid  unfortunate
> misunderstandings during search and destroy missions.

Better yet...  forget the "search and destroy" stuff.  Get out of Iraq.
  Killing only brings more killing.  I thought we were done with the
"eye for an eye" and "life for a life" bullshit.


> Why would any good
> Muslims think it was a dandy idea to have a group of Jihadist/Terrorist bomb
> makers operating in the house next door?

Why indeed!  It's bad for the neighbourhood.