Tejek Re...Nonetheless, I still think there is a difference between covering your entire body as opposed to those parts of the anatomy that are considered sexual. By covering a person's face, you take away that person's identity....their sense of individuality. I find that far more extreme than covering breasts and/or genitalia.<<<<<<<<<<<
AHHH a subject we can agree upon. Also, I would like to say that the dress codes for women, probably
have more backing from women than men. In other words, it is a horse of a different color if womans dress codes are drafted by women, because women in general feel comfortable with a certain dress code; although I would have to say, dress code changes with the times, such as the mini skirt era, or hot pants era. When one votes for a dress code, it is likely that that person will abide by it. I don't want to imply that men don't want a dress code for woman, it is just that it is likely to be more revealing than woman are comfortable with; just a guess.
As far as our other discussion on the other thread.
You know that I am not a Dem.<<<<<<<<
You know that old saying, " if it walks like a duck, if it talks like a duck, if it looks like a duck, it is a duck. And you walk, and talk like a Dem. At any rate, I am just curious, your beliefs and biases lean so heavily to the dems, why are you denying that you are a dem. Why not admit it? There certainly isn't anything wrong with being a dem. per se.
and we all know the dems are in the pocket of the Bar Ass.
This is where it gets stupid and I stop posting.<<<<<<<<<<<
Read these.
http://www.cato.org/dailys/12-28-99.html
www6.law.com
state.in.us
It might surprise you to know how much bribing is going on to get gov. contracts. We both know the majority of donations is going to the dems.; although I would agree that both parties are doing it.
Question...yes; close down a person's business indefinitely on flimsy information...no.<<<<<<
How would you know if it was flimsy; and how would one know until it is investigated? The IRS also seizes bank accounts on a whim, and the DEA can seize your business account at any time. All of these should be curtailed; however the the rationale for closing down a suspected terrorist financier would be more urgent than the others, because the terrorist could harm the general public, while the legal proceedings drag on.
I am in favor of military tribunals, if they are set up right,for two main reasons. First, because the public's right to know could hurt us in this case. The gov. needs the ability to collect info worldwide, without having to compromise their sources, just as journalists. It should be possible for an independent moderator to reveal the nature and verify the veracity, to defense att. and the defendant, without giving away too many vital secrets. I feel it is far more likely that these sources will be kept secret in a tribunal, and the gov. needs the ability to prosecute, without compromising future investigations, or national secrets. Secondly, a speedy trial is an aximoran in todays justice system, and you just can't let these guys walk the streets for two to 10 yrs, while their lawyers are using delaying tactics. Unless you are willing to lock all of these suspects up with no bail, or somehow can be sure they won't flee to another country, a speedy military trial might be the most fair for everyone. If a person is found guilty, then use the appeals process to keep it fair.
The man's business was closed down; it was in the papers on at least two occasions that illegal activities were in operation in his place<<<<<<<
If this were true, the the suspect could sue big time for libel, if the papers said he was guilty, instead of saying he was a suspect.
Once again, the FBI proved to be wrong. So it wasn't unpatriotic, it was libelous.<<<<<<<<
Once again, it is the FBI's duty to investigate tips. What do you expect them to do?
Right, they saved this guy tons of money. His right to conduct business was denied him for over a month, but that's okay...he's Arab American...they don't have the same rights as the rest of us.<<<<<<<
Arab americans have the same rights any other suspect would have. But to expect Arab americans to be totaly free from profiling is ludicrous. I will say it again. If the Arab Americans expect to be treated like the rest of us, they need to protect America's interests first. In other words, when Rachman, the anti American cleric was preaching in NY, the Arab community should have disavowed themselves publicly, and denounced it vociferously, and Rachman should have been run out of the country by the Arab American community themselves. By straddeling the fence, the Arab American community has invited suspicion. To get rid of the suspicion, the Arab community needs to let it be known that they will not tolerate any cleric teaching such stuff, and that the community and clerics here actively encourages any member to inform the proper authorities of any suspicious activity, even if it includes their friends. The Arab American community needs to show us that their country comes first, Islam second; not the other way around as it is in many of the Arab countries. The Arab American community needs PR just as much as AMD does.
We know that the new revisions to our laws like wire tapping will be used only against Arab Americans. <<<<<<<<
Who are you trying to kid? These new laws will be used against anyone suspected of any crime, not just Arab Americans.
Fear will destroy this country and its economy long before terrorism has the opportunity.<<<<<<<<
Fear of terrorism has already destroyed many businesses. We are at war with the terrorists, and freedoms always get restricted during wartimes. If and when the war terminates, many of the restrictions will be voted out also. But for now, many of these restrictions are a necessary evil.
I worry about the terrorists and what they will do next; I am afraid of what we will do to ourselves in the name of terrorism.<<<<<<<
And I worry that America and the world won't have the will to do whatever is necessary to rid ourselves of terrorism. Here you are whinning about the FBI interrogating a few people. What if your country asked you or your children to enlist to help fight the war. Those are the people who you should be concerned about. The people who are willing to put it on the line to save our butts and our freedoms. While I am too old to fight, I intend to support our military fully and completely, even if it means giving up some freedoms, because giving up these freedoms mean diddly squat, compared to what our service men are risking on our behalf. When the war is over, then I will worry about those freedoms. |
