Silicon Investor
SI
SI
Advertise on SI

 Politics | AMERICA UNDER SIEGE: The End of Innocence

Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Selectric II who wrote (10446)11/13/2001 10:59:12 PM
From: Lola   of 26129
 
Yes allowed. Instead of smacking Pakistan for continuing to support terrorism in India the U.S. tells India to have a dialogue with Pakistan. What they should do is demand that Pakistan do away with the terrorist training camps that train people to carry out terrorist acts inside India. India has been told by the U.S. not to cross over into Pakistan to destroy their training camps because the U.S. needs Pakistan right now. Terrorist acts are a daily occurence in India ... almost all of the terrorists in Kashmir are from Pakistan ... this is about the clearest case of state sponsored terrorism there is ... except the state happens to be a U.S. ally so we're supposed to turn the other cheek. Can you say hypocrites?

Lola:)

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Runner who wrote (10440)11/13/2001 11:04:20 PM
From: Selectric II   of 26129
 
distance.jhsph.edu 

Maybe, but he doesn't seem to conjure up images of a terrorist, whatever that image is:
(click above and scroll down to second faculty member)

Irshad Shaikh, MD, MPH, PhD

Associate, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health

Irshad Shaikh completed his medical degree and postgraduate diploma in community medicine in Pakistan. He received his MPH and PhD degrees from the Johns Hopkins University, concentrating in epidemiology and international health. He has over ten years of experience in primary and preventative care, community-based health systems management and research, and population-based health surveys in developing countries.

He has been the course coordinator for this course for over five years and is presently serving as the health commissioner in Chester County, Pennsylvania.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Selectric II who wrote (10452)11/13/2001 11:11:07 PM
From: lorne   of 26129
 
Bush Order Would Allow Terrorist Trials by Military Commission
Published: Nov 13, 2001
" WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush approved the use of a special military tribunal Tuesday that could put accused terrorists on trial faster and in greater secrecy than an ordinary criminal court. The United States has not convened such a tribunal since World War II."
Full story >>>
ap.tbo.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Monkey Man who wrote (10445)11/13/2001 11:11:15 PM
From: Selectric II   of 26129
 
Remember, Dubyah's papa was the head of our KGB, and he's a good ole' boy -- there's a long tradition of comaraderie in that club, in addition to the umbrellas with poisoned needle tips.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: lorne who wrote (10448)11/13/2001 11:18:45 PM
From: Selectric II   of 26129
 
"US aircraft bombed the Al-Jazeera offices in Kabul during the night," the station announced... Then the correspondent in Kandahar, southern stronghold of the Taliban militia, said he had given his last broadcast and was getting out, editorial staff told AFP. Yussef Al-Shuli gave his last report from Kandahar in the middle of the day," one editor told AFP, asking not to be named. "He's packed his bags and gone."

Maybe some tv news people have more sense than they're sometimes given credit for, although it's hard to believe. <g>

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: William B. Kohn who wrote (10439)11/13/2001 11:20:04 PM
From: Captain Jack   of 26129
 
william-- it is time to close the wallet. They'll starve if we did,, and they know the bleeding hearts will not permit the US to stand by while assholes starve,, sad but true. Just think how many fewer we would need to feed if the assholes starved to death--- I thought about it,,, I'd not miss them or feel too bad...

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Monkey Man who wrote (10445)11/13/2001 11:25:38 PM
From: Lola   of 26129
 
One of the things that the U.S. should fear most is a Russia/India/China alliance ... that would be a very powerful alliance. Fortunately India doesn't care much for China ... but India has always had a great relationship with Russia. The U.S. have to get at least one of those players on their side to keep the balance of power. At the moment the U.S. is not tight with any of these 3 countries ... although the 9 months prior to the attacks the U.S. was working hard to improve it's relationship with India. Lately India has not been amused by how the U.S. has treated them in regard to India's problems with terrorism. India has taken steps recently to cement their bonds with Russia.

Lola:)

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Lola who wrote (10451)11/13/2001 11:31:50 PM
From: Selectric II   of 26129
 
Are we sure that steps haven't already been taken to the extent possible in these past short two months, or that more aren't coming? Do you really think Pakistan is calling the shots that much? Do you think Musharraf is even that secure in power right now?

I'd rather think of it in terms of how the administration has characterized this from the start -- a long term strategy, worldwide in scope, with varying coalition partners as we need to focus on various objectives, each in due course.

The alternative would seem to be what the Taliban is doing right now and what Mullah Omar complained about his own troops engaging in -- going "hither and thither."

Nobody ever won a war using a "hither and thither" strategy.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Selectric II who wrote (10458)11/13/2001 11:36:55 PM
From: Lola   of 26129
 
I would hope the stuff that goes on behind the scenes is very different from some of the stuff we're seeing. Musharraf sure acts like he calls the shots if you read all his rhetoric in regard to India in Pakistani and Indian media. The impression he is giving is that he's going to get something out of India as a reward for him helping the U.S. in Afghanistan. You have no idea how much that pisses off Indians ... I'm Indian by the way in case you haven't already figured this out.<ggg>

Musharraf can forget about any kind of reward ... India has other plans for him for the terror he's unleashed on them for so many years.

Pakistan never seems to learn from their mistakes though. They have fought 3 wars with India and lost every time. Not only do they not get what they want in a war but Pakistan becomes even more fragmented with every war. How many times do they have to lose before they stop picking fights with a country 10 times their size?

Lola:)

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: lorne who wrote (10453)11/13/2001 11:38:46 PM
From: Selectric II   of 26129
 
Interesting... "...There is precedent for such panels.

President Franklin Roosevelt had suspected World War II saboteurs secretly tried by military commission, and six were executed. The Supreme Court upheld the proceeding. An enemy who sneaked onto U.S. soil "for the purposes of waging war by destruction of life or property" was a combatant who could be tried in a military court, the Supreme Court ruled.

Military tribunals were also used during and after the Civil War.

Gonzales, the president's top lawyer, said a military commission could have several advantages over a civilian court, including secrecy.

"This is a global war. To have successful prosecutions, we might have to give up sources and methods," about the way the investigation was conducted if the trial was held in a civilian court, Gonzales said. "We don't want to have to do that."

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQ
Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.