Originally Posted by foundit66

I'm sorry.
Too many syllables for you?

It's interesting to note that you claim I don't "say very much", but you still want to respond to me...
Your actions speak louder than your words...

Originally Posted by foundit66

QUOTE me Jefferson.
QUOTE what I supposedly said that you claim means me claiming rules don't change during a time of war.

QUOTE me.
Don't just refer to a page.
QUOTE me.

Can't do it, can you...



1) I never claimed that there aren't different rules for a time of war.
2) Like I explained to you already, my request was regarding the SPECIFIC CONTEXT OF WIRE-TAPPING. I wanted you to show me how THOSE rules changed in a time of war.

Originally Posted by alias

What does one have to do with the other? Nothing.

Originally Posted by alias

Do you want us to believe phones were not being tapped in WWII? There were nazi spies all over this country and there were American and British spies all over Europe during WWII. Get real man.

Originally Posted by foundit66

Irrelevant.
Just because it may have happened then doesn't make it right.

We also put Japanese Americans in internment camps also.
Does that mean it was okay?

Once again, you side-step the point with meaningless commentary.

Originally Posted by alias

Of course it's irrelevant to you. Everything you don't agree with is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by alias

That does not mean it isn't the truth.

Originally Posted by alias

When you fight a war, you do what you have to do to protect your country and defeat the enemy. Only a fool would voluntarily submit to rules when the enemy isn't.

Originally Posted by foundit66

It's irrelevant to the question of whether or not it is LEGAL and CONSTITUTIONAL.

Just because our government has gotten away with it, does that make it legal?
The answer is NO.
THAT is why it is irrelevant.



"truth"?
All you have done is RAISE CONJECTURE as to what might have happened during WW II.
You haven't presented any "truth".

And you sure as heck haven't addressed why it happening during WW II makes it right today...



It is a sign of immorality to pretend that two wrongs make it right.
Just because your enemy violates certain rights doesn't mean that we have to.

We "voluntarily submit" to rules that the enemy doesn't all the time.

"The Bush administration has agreed to apply the Geneva Conventions to all terrorism suspects in U.S. custody..."
http://www.defendingthetruth.com/exe...html#post50546

Tell me.
Does that make Bush a FOOL????

Originally Posted by alias

I don't feel the enemies of America have any of our constitutional rights. The US constitution is for the American people, not our enemies. Enemies have no rights as far as I am concerned. If we have enemies, then our enemies are enemies of our constitution and the president is sworn to protect America from those enemies, not to use our constitution to protect them. You and a few others don't get it.

Originally Posted by alias

I don't agree that Bush has to use the Geneva Convention rules. Some people think he does. If I were Bush, I would say anything you want to hear and then do whatever it takes to win the war.

Originally Posted by alias

When you fight a war, you do what you have to do to protect your country and defeat the enemy. Only a fool would voluntarily submit to rules when the enemy isn't.

Originally Posted by foundit66

Man. Every time you say that other people "don't get" something, it typically means that there is something YOU DO NOT get.

I am not talking about spying on the enemy. Not at all.
You keep trying to CHANGE THE SUBJECT because you CAN'T DEAL with what the issue is.

It's Bush wire-tapping INNOCENT AMERICAN CIVILIANS (who are NOT the enemy) without a warrant.



Those are the thoughts of a person who is bound to commit war crimes.
It's a good thing you never served in the military. Your refusal to adhere to the rules would just denigrate the very fabric of our military.
Your desire to look for excuses to ignore the rules is rather disturbing.