Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The other 2012 Election.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Mexico (off-topic)
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kona



Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Busan, South Korea

PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:26 am    Post subject: Re: First................................................... Reply with quote

disraeli123 wrote:


As far as any humiliation that may or may not have violated the rights of Iraquis that was stupid. I will say one thing though I come from a group of people who have had to live near the savages in the Middle East have you ever been there. Have you ever had someone get on a bus and then go for a bomb and the bomb failed to work right otherwise you might have died. June 18, 1982. I was in Jerusalem on vacation a lady with a baby came on the bus she tried to trigger a bomb under her shawl it failed she was grabbed before she could try a second time. 35 people on the bus including me women and children as well. When the Muslim world decides to act like civilized human beings maybe we won't over react sometimes. Just check today a rumor of a movie made in the U.S. that questions the prophet Muhamed sets people off in Libya and Egypt one American killed in a consulate in Libya and several people hurt both in Libya and Egypt. You can talk about human rights how about my right to live and I was almost killed how about hundreds of people murdered on buses or in the World Trade Center come on KONA are you that out of touch. No such thing as FREEDOM in the Islamic world one exception Turkey they act like "savages" look at Syria. Yes we might have gone over the line, but look at the provocations for G-d sake.

I'm sorry for the long paragraph, but the left's support for Islamic savages just makes me sick. I am an American, but I have many relatives in a small country over there who have to live with these problems every day.


I have not lived next to those "savages" in the middle east. I have lived next to those "savages" in the United States. Some were pretty cool people. But let me get your argument you summed up here straight: we shouldn't care about muslim rights because the countries where that are muslim majority don't care about civil rights.

So you think that civil liberities should not exist for certain people BASED on their religion, because they are "savages" and don't believe in freedom. Our civil rights are guarnteed through the judicial amendments of the constitution, something that the founding fathers thought EVERYONE deserved. So to me, in sounds like you don't care about the constitution at all, or only care about it when it suits your protection and interests.

To quote John McCain: "It's not about who they are. It's about who we are".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disraeli123



Joined: 12 May 2012
Posts: 143
Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:42 am    Post subject: Kona give me a break........................................ Reply with quote

Kona, First of all until you live in their native area where Arabs Muslims act naturally see Syria, Egypt then talk to me about knowing them. The 1972 Israeli Massacre at the Olympics does that ring a bell etc, etc, etc. I could give over a hundred such incidents so don't give me that you lived near them and knew them in the states. Have you heard of the " Honor killings" where parents kill their daughters in the U.S., because their daughters want to be like other Americans and won't tow the fundamentalist line once in the U.S. so their father kills them nice the last one happened in New Orleans 2 months ago the father was just convicted of first degree murder he will be sent to jail for life. Substance KONA not your lefty spin life not death that is the difference between the two civilizations.


Second theme tonight didn't Romney clean the MUMBLER in CHIEFS CLOCK. It was down right to easy for Romney see the current affairs blog for more on the debate. I'll be around, but not all the time, but we'll see who wins on Nov. 6th a man of substance or just HOT AIR Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kona



Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Busan, South Korea

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:03 am    Post subject: Re: Kona give me a break.................................... Reply with quote

disraeli123 wrote:
Kona, First of all until you live in their native area where Arabs Muslims act naturally see Syria, Egypt then talk to me about knowing them. The 1972 Israeli Massacre at the Olympics does that ring a bell etc, etc, etc. I could give over a hundred such incidents so don't give me that you lived near them and knew them in the states. Have you heard of the " Honor killings" where parents kill their daughters in the U.S., because their daughters want to be like other Americans and won't tow the fundamentalist line once in the U.S. so their father kills them nice the last one happened in New Orleans 2 months ago the father was just convicted of first degree murder he will be sent to jail for life. Substance KONA not your lefty spin life not death that is the difference between the two civilizations.


Second theme tonight didn't Romney clean the MUMBLER in CHIEFS CLOCK. It was down right to easy for Romney see the current affairs blog for more on the debate. I'll be around, but not all the time, but we'll see who wins on Nov. 6th a man of substance or just HOT AIR Very Happy


Wow. Alright, I'll stop with the lefty spin stuff, cause there's no spin in your top, obviously. You're absolutely right. They're all savages, what was I thinking. Some idiot does some honor killing stuff and your right, it represents all the millions of muslims in the united states. That kind of stuff never happens with other Americans; hell, I'm from the Pacific Northwest, and we have NO murderers or serial killers whatsoever. But as far as muslims go, yea, you got a point, we should torture them, kill them, and their families too, because hey, you gotta fight fire with fire. Thank you for enlightening me disraeli, I feel like I understand the Arab world so much better now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kona



Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Busan, South Korea

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh yea, almost forgot, that John McCain guy: what a liberal. I mean c'mon, what does he know about torture.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disraeli123



Joined: 12 May 2012
Posts: 143
Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:03 pm    Post subject: Kona, Kona, Kona,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Reply with quote

No one is saying all Muslims, but even the law abiding ones do not speak out against the horrors caused by the extremists. You try to use people like McCain and as usual he actually was in favor of water boarding. Kona this is the bottom line until you have been on a bus that just by luck wasn't blown up please don't lecture me on the rights of terrorists. People who live in a fantasy who have never come close to being killed have very little perspective on what is happening around the world with Muslims.

I happen to have lost 2 cousins in the 9/11 attack and like I said before in the summer of 1982 a suicide bomber almost killed me and 30 some odd other people who were on a bus in Jerusalem. I also, have a cousin who has lost 2 fingers, because of terrorism. You see your nice, nice, fru, fru approach doesn't work. You shake off and ignore the honor killings call honor killings in the U.S., if you don't want to believe me you'll find dozens of such killings happening in the U.S. in the past few years see the internet search on yahoo or google. As I said before you can go back to the 1972 massacre of the Israeli Olympic team even farther back than that, but how many instances of terror or murder do you need in order for you to understand what we are dealing with here. I don't expect you to understand you do not have holes in your families past, because of terrorism or genocide, but I do and I was almost one of those holes so understand that the word savages although harsh is probably mild, if you see what is playing out in Syria, Egypt and in other parts of the world look the other way, but I know I'm right and you are just another version of Neville Chamberlain"Peace in our time" then one year later the start of WW 2 and 6 years later nearly 60 million dead bodies that is what happens when you ignore or look the other way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geaaronson



Joined: 19 Apr 2005
Posts: 948
Location: Mexico City

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 1:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You try to use people like McCain and as usual he actually was in favor of water boarding


Wow, really, I learn something new every day!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geaaronson



Joined: 19 Apr 2005
Posts: 948
Location: Mexico City

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here`s a quote from a commentator on the website titled "JOHN MCCAIN AND TORTURE"

Quote:
Citing his time as a POW, McCain has frequently taken the high ground on the detention and interrogation of detainees in the White House's so-called War on Terror. On October 3rd, 2005, he introduced the McCain Detainee Amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill for 2005. Two days later the United States Senate voted 90-9 to pass the amendment which prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners, including prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, by limiting interrogations to the methods detailed in the US military's Field Manual 34-52 on Intelligence Interrogation.

President Bush had threatened to veto the bill if McCain's language was included but he subsequently accepted McCain's terms after what were reported to be hard-nosed negotiations between the Senator and the White House. McCain, his off-the-cuff comments revealing his genuine ambivalence on the issue, told Chris Matthews of MSNBC:




"We had quite a period of strong, spirited discussion with the administration about that. We passed, as you know, some months ago a thing called the Detainee Treatment Act, which prohibits any cruel, inhumane treatment, and in this legislation we made it very clear that that still pertained. I won't go through all the details of it, but it does not allow torture, and it will not allow torture. And at the same time, I think you do understand that there are some people who are very, very bad people, and I think that to continue a program for some of them, without torture, is something that we can't deprive the President of the United States of. But I think we struck the right balance, and I can assure you I would never agree to anything that I believe could allow torture. I promise you that."

Bush benefited from the McCain endorsement, saying that he would "make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention of torture, whether it be here at home or abroad." But the catch was that President Bush made clear his interpretation of the legislation in a signing statement, reserving what he described as his presidential constitutional authority to avoid further terrorist attacks, which would include the use of torture if necessary. McCain knew perfectly well that he had surrendered on the issue but did not object, feeling that he had occupied the moral high ground and picked up the favorable headlines while preserving the president's authority to carry out "enhanced interrogations."

Even more disturbing is McCain's embrace of the Military Commissions Act of October 2006. The reported "compromise" before the bill was passed and the media acclamation of John McCain as a champion of human rights was shameful. Bush security advisor Stephen Hadley described the bill as "good news and a good day for the American people" while McCain asserted that it safeguarded "the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions." In reality, the act did nothing of the sort. It stripped habeas corpus rights for citizens and non-citizens accused of terrorism and legalized US war crimes committed before December 30th, 2005. It also prevented individuals injured or killed through US violation of the Geneva Conventions from filing a claim in a US court. Legal US residents were denied their right to challenge their detention in court if they are accused of being enemy combatants and the act also retroactively abolished the right of Guantánamo detainees to challenge their detention. Concerning torture, the act approved the CIA program that had allowed waterboarding and other forms of "enhanced interrogation" and authorized the president to define Geneva Conventions violations as he sees fit without any appeal to the courts. There is no prohibition of the Bush administration's once again authorizing waterboarding, threats against a prisoner's family, and hypothermia, all of which are considered to be both illegal and war crimes. The Military Commissions also permitted the designation of any individuals as unlawful enemy combatants if they provide material support to those engaged in hostilities against the US, a concept previously found unconstitutional. Even worse, the law expands the definition "unlawful enemy combatant" to include anyone cited by a tribunal under the authority of the president or the defense secretary. The law denies anyone determined to be an enemy combatant and anyone "awaiting such determination" the right to challenge the detention, treatment or conditions of confinement in court, even if there is evidence that they were subjected to torture, and it permits the use of evidence obtained from torture in the military tribunals.

McCain's most recent endorsement of torture was his vote against the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2008 on February 13th. The bill was hotly debated because it would make it illegal for US intelligence agencies to use interrogation techniques that are forbidden by the military's guidelines. President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation and McCain lined up with 38 other Republican Senators, one Democrat, and his good friend independent Joe Lieberman to vote against it. In the debate McCain argued somewhat bizarrely that while he strongly opposes torture he is unwilling to apply the military's standards to the intelligence agencies. Lieberman commented that waterboarding is not torture in any event as it does not permanent damage.

John McCain is a hypocrite and also a classic enabler. He publicly abhors a practice, apparently reflecting his genuine sentiments, but then covertly supports it for his own personal political gain. He and an acquiescent Congress have bestowed on the president of the United States the unilateral authority to determine interrogation tactics. Administration officials, instead of Congress or the courts, have been empowered to determine what constitutes a violation of the Geneva Conventions. As the White House continues to refuse to detail which interrogation practices are actually barred, it is possible to assume that under the proper circumstances anyone might be tortured based on suspicion or for no reason at all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disraeli123



Joined: 12 May 2012
Posts: 143
Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:49 am    Post subject: OK one mistake, but overall I'm right....................... Reply with quote

So I made a mistake MIA CULPA. You take one mistake, but do not or will not comment on the bulk of my last entry why?????? I would speculate that you can't or won't comment, because you have nothing that you can say, because you don't have holes in your family history, because of terrorism and genocide. It's easy to find a mistake, but what, if the McCain misquote was deliberate. I wanted to see, if you would go any further into my entry and address the bulk of my argument which you did both of you like Pavlov's dogs. You jumped at the obvious mistake and then ignored the bulk and most important part of my entry, so enjoy your little victory, but you need to engage all parts of a persons arguments.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kona



Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Busan, South Korea

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:44 am    Post subject: Re: OK one mistake, but overall I'm right................... Reply with quote

disraeli123 wrote:
So I made a mistake MIA CULPA. You take one mistake, but do not or will not comment on the bulk of my last entry why?????? I would speculate that you can't or won't comment, because you have nothing that you can say, because you don't have holes in your family history, because of terrorism and genocide. It's easy to find a mistake, but what, if the McCain misquote was deliberate. I wanted to see, if you would go any further into my entry and address the bulk of my argument which you did both of you like Pavlov's dogs. You jumped at the obvious mistake and then ignored the bulk and most important part of my entry, so enjoy your little victory, but you need to engage all parts of a persons arguments.


disraeli, I don't know you, and have no idea what you and your family has experienced. I don't pretend to, and I only have my experiences and knowledge of history to go off of. This is an internet forum, and as such, everyone on here is anonymous and there's no way we can verify the things you say. That said, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you have seen some things that I can't imagine. I've got friends and family members who have seen equally brutal things as well, and I don't hold there viewpoints on such matters against them if they don't completely line up with my point of view (and while we may disagree, you'd be surprised how often we don't on things such as this). I also can't say that I would be any different from you if I had seen suicide attacks myself, or if my family was a victim of islamic terrorism (I also can't say I'd have much love for Israel if they bombed the hospital my family was in, but that's neither here nor there).

However, even putting the moral argument aside of whether or not it is ok to subject prisoners to "enhanced interrogation techniques", there is considerable research out there (as well as many people in the intelligence and law enforcement community) that don't believe these techniques work.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/25/new-research-suggests-enhanced-interrogation-not-effective.html

The simple fact of the matter is, people who are interrogated are a. not always terrorists (a big problem they had in Iraq), b. not always hesitant to give up information, and c. will give information that an interrogator wants to hear, rather than what actually happened. It can lead to all sorts of intelligence cluster ****.

Life is not an episode of 24.

But from a moral standpoint, let me just show this to you.

Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

These are all judicial protections that every human being deserves, not just the citizens of this country. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" ~ Declaration of Independence
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disraeli123



Joined: 12 May 2012
Posts: 143
Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:05 pm    Post subject: Kona........................................................ Reply with quote

Fair enough since you don't know me or my background........ Those amendments otherwise known as the Bill of Rights do not I repeat do not cover terrorists that are caught on the battlefield that is why Guantanemo was set up in the first place. Again you do not understand the founders they never intended the Bill of Rights to cover terrorists you might want them to, but happily your not likely to ever be in power.

Kona when it comes to Israel, show me where any of Israel's actions since the founding in 1948 were not either retaliation for an attack or like in 1967 a preemptive strike to prevent an attack and this after Nasser closed the straits of Tiran an act of war. Israel has always used it's military in a defensive mode except when too many Israeli's have been killed and they then had to take offensive action to defend their population. The Arabs can have peace any time they want they only have to ask and make no preconditions, but don't hold your breath that isn't happening any time soon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geaaronson



Joined: 19 Apr 2005
Posts: 948
Location: Mexico City

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

disraeli

I am sorry that I injured your fragile ego by not covering all the points that you made. I do, however, give you credit for the "mea culpa". That takes a real man.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disraeli123



Joined: 12 May 2012
Posts: 143
Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:54 am    Post subject: geaaronson.................................................. Reply with quote

Once again you didn't read beyond the Mea Culpa part of the entry. As I said you didn't address the full extent of my argument. My ego doesn't bruise so easily I just don't like people cherry picking my arguments. The Mea Culpa was a ruse to get you to really address my argument at least Kona tried not well, but he tried.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geaaronson



Joined: 19 Apr 2005
Posts: 948
Location: Mexico City

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

disraeli

You must be in a perpetual state of denial. Yes, I do insist your ego is easily bruised as you can`t stand that people don`t pay you sufficient attention. I will get around to addressing your concerns but you see I have a life outside the internet and I plan to live it. Your anxieties are not important to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kona



Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Busan, South Korea

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:55 am    Post subject: Re: Kona.................................................... Reply with quote

disraeli123 wrote:
Fair enough since you don't know me or my background........ Those amendments otherwise known as the Bill of Rights do not I repeat do not cover terrorists that are caught on the battlefield that is why Guantanemo was set up in the first place. Again you do not understand the founders they never intended the Bill of Rights to cover terrorists you might want them to, but happily your not likely to ever be in power.

Kona when it comes to Israel, show me where any of Israel's actions since the founding in 1948 were not either retaliation for an attack or like in 1967 a preemptive strike to prevent an attack and this after Nasser closed the straits of Tiran an act of war. Israel has always used it's military in a defensive mode except when too many Israeli's have been killed and they then had to take offensive action to defend their population. The Arabs can have peace any time they want they only have to ask and make no preconditions, but don't hold your breath that isn't happening any time soon.


You should read about how the British POWs were treated by Americans during the Revolutionary War.

Both my grandpas fought in WWII; one on the Pacific front and one in Europe. One earned a silver star running ammo for a mortar cannon and keeping artillerly lines functioning under heavy fire. They caught a lot of Germans afterwards.

You think they waterboarded them afterwards?

Israel has been found guilty of countless human rights abuses by numerous international bodies. The settlers out in the west bank are just as big of religious zealots as the radical muslims that they hate so much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Isla Guapa



Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Posts: 1514
Location: Mexico City o sea La Gran Manzana Mexicana

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:30 am    Post subject: Re: Kona.................................................... Reply with quote

kona wrote:


The settlers out in the west bank are just as big of religious zealots as the radical muslims that they hate so much.


Ironic, isn't it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Mexico (off-topic) All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Page 9 of 11

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2011 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Road2Spain - TEFL and Spanish with one year student visa
EBC