Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ilaine who wrote (121820)	6/23/2005 8:05:21 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) of 793896

If they can't reach a consensus, please don't expect me to come up with a single, coherent, one-size-fits-all explanation. I wasn't looking for a legal opinion. Past SC rulings are not central, IMO, because they come from another time and place. They don't tell us what we should do. They tell us only what support we might get or obstacles we might face in implementing whatever makes sense to do in this time and place. I was trying to figure out how your criminal justice model could be made to work in this scenario, how it could be constructive and successful, how it makes sense in terms of all that we stand for and what we want to accomplish and the evolving face of war. You're a lawyer. I'm a systems analyst. I still thought we could communicate. If you and I can't communicate, I don't know who can. I know you don't like polarization, either. One way in which this country is polarized is the question of whether we use a military or criminal model in dealing with our enemy. We need to find a way to communicate. One just can't dismiss those who favor a criminal model as airheads or those who favor a military model as brutes, depending on which pole one clings to.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next