George Galloway blasts the Senate

WhoodaThunk wrote:

McTag wrote:
At that school, the professors piss on the kids, right? And beat some of them to death, I expect.

That was a funny joke article there.

Uh ..... no. In that school it's hot, the food sucks, & you can't pray.

It's called irony.

And they lead the kids, manacled, around with black bags over their heads, even when they have nothing to blame them for, but they might have done something? Certainly, if they were in the wrong place?

It's called sarcasm.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Besides we didn't fly over either Russia or China on a weekly basis - much less frequently than that, and not at all after '58 when they shot down our U-2. (Prior to that it had been a fairly regular thing.)

The downing of the U-2 (Gary Powers) over Russia was in May 1960.

On 27 Oct 1962, Maj. Charles Maultsby strays over western edge of Siberia, he eventually lands "dead stick" on an Alaskan auxiliary field.

0 Replies

Back with legal opinion of learned counsel, a professor of international law:

1. The "complete and exclusive sovereignty" a state possesses over its aerial territory ends at the uppermost height at which aircraft are capable of flying. Altitude of 90,000 ft is unique to this single aircraft and so it must be excluded from the general aircraft class.

2. The Bogota declaration of 1976 never applied to Cuba, which was not a signatory.

3. The Latin legal principle "Caveat humana dominandi, quod omnes tangit ab omnes approbatur" (what concerns all must be approved by all) doesn't apply as there is no international treaty, so by analogy the Law of the Seas relevant clause asserting the existence of "a zone of innocent passage"applies especially since Cuba never alleged its citizens were endangered by SR-71 overflights, so the Law of the Seas treaty applies.

Anyone wants to argue legalese please apply elsewhere - I only represent that I faithfully reproduced here what the professor actually said Smile

0 Replies

Walter - you got the wrong plane, the SR-71 was at issue here, not the U-2, so the Gary Powers case is irrelevant.

0 Replies

Sorry am at tiny portable and can't look up previous page which is outside regular screen size - if George said '58 instead of '60 for Powers I'm sure he'll come back to correct it.

Even so Cuba - original point of JTT - overflights were in accordance with international law.

0 Replies

"1. The "complete and exclusive sovereignty" a state possesses over its aerial territory ends at the uppermost height at which aircraft are capable of flying. Altitude of 90,000 ft is unique to this single aircraft and so it must be excluded from the general aircraft class."

This doesnt follow hoft. If you said "aircraft which that state possesses" it would at least be logical.

Aircraft in general must include SR71 in particular. And any other capable of flying higher. They are after all craft in the (rarified) air.

0 Replies

Steve - please excuse me one sec while I re-contact my international legal counsel >>> brb

0 Replies

whilst Helen is away contacting international legal advise.....lets all have some fun......ooops she's back Wink

0 Replies

Back - he said an overview for non-lawyers is to be found here >>

http://perseus.herts.ac.uk/uhinfo/library/i89918_3.pdf

>> but the determining factor in the absence of a treaty is rule by analogy with an existing treaty - the Law of the Sea being the closest one - so the
"zone of innocent passage" clause is sufficient and conclusive, especially since the government of Cuba never filed any complaint about any alleged violations of its airspace.

Next - anybody wants more opinions from this lawyer gotta send a check! Smile

0 Replies

you mix in rarified circles hoft

at least 90 k feet or 1729 pascal

0 Replies

Steve - all I had to do with this particular lawyer was smile sweetly and ask; for you however if you call and he answers the phone it's $50K right there - who said there's any justice in this world?!

0 Replies

OK, Gary Powers was shot down in 1960, not 1958. For many years the U.S. conducted overflights of the USSR, China and other countries. In addition we did what were called Ferret missions - flights directly at the coast or borders of a target nation, designed to get them to shift their air defense and other systems into active mode so we could collect the signature data for their equipment and assess their readiness. (also to spook them about just what we might do and where). A similar pattern of activities involved our submarines. Some of this stuff is starting to come out in the public domain.

The Soviets also tried this (and other stuff) but generally with less effect. For a while they had us convinced they had many more long range aircraft and submarines than they actually had. Gradually we came to understand that, though many of their systems were well-designed and capable, the morale and training of their forces was generally poor.

This was all a part of the Cold War deterrence game - it worked, and we confused and demoralized them enough to get out of it all without a war.

0 Replies

Similar was still done in 1970 (submarines, persons landing on Warsaw Pact territory from seasite).

In the Batic Sea and North Sea the Sovjet "fisher boats" were famous as well.

0 Replies

possibly those very good - and quiet - German diesel submarines???

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

WhoodaThunk wrote:
McTag wrote:
At that school, the professors piss on the kids, right? And beat some of them to death, I expect.

That was a funny joke article there.

Uh ..... no. In that school it's hot, the food sucks, & you can't pray.

It's called irony.

And they lead the kids, manacled, around with black bags over their heads, even when they have nothing to blame them for, but they might have done something? Certainly, if they were in the wrong place?

It's called sarcasm.

From the forementioned site discussing real POW abuses:

"In light of the grandstanding and posturing of certain politicians, it certain is revealing to note that our treatment of the Muslim POWs is almost gentle compared to what our American and British POWs received in some of the forced marches at the end of WWII. Add to this the recent beheading of an American civilian and our military soldiers look pretty good in my view. When one contemplates how the Japanese, Germans, Vietnamese, and the Mid-Eastern Muslims have treated POWs in the past, in order to obtain intelligence information during war times, I am amazed over the uproar and indignation caused by a few photographs of 21 year old kids trying to please their superiors who have instructed them to "sofen them up for interrogation". There are lots of torture methods worse than taking away a prisoner's clothes. Ask some of our living ex-POWs like Sen. John McCain."

It's called reality.

0 Replies

The current issue of Time magazine features the Gitmo interrogation of Detainee 063 the alleged 20th 9-11 hijacker. Extreme measures to be sure.

The following article puts it all in perspective, though, detailing the ease with which a terrorist could target an American nuclear power plant and the tens of thousands of casualties which could result. (I live within 50 miles of two of them -- one upwind, one downwind. I care about that possibility.)

When our borders were even more porous than they are now, men of Arab descent were scouting the hydroelectric dams of the Tennessee Valley Authority asking odd questions. Why? The perils of a "dirty bomb" in a metro area have been thoroughly discussed.

An Arab has been arrested trying to light his shoe on a passenger jet. An Arab has been arrested for planning to bomb a Columbus, OH mall. Arabs have been arrested trying to enter the country through Washington state. I give Arab profiling a hearty thumbs-up.

And ... okay ... there are detainees at Guantanamo Bay and they're not being afforded the privileges to which you think they're entitled.

Considering where they were apprehended and what their activities were at the time, I would much rather have my country err in the interest of protecting its citizenry rather than worrying about infringing on the civil liberties of a crowd of foreign nationals detained in a war zone.

Reality check, please.

Or is that too difficult for those of you cozily tucked away in the comfort of your homes on a distant continent?

0 Replies

Reality be damned, they followed the letter of the law:

http://www.tampabaylive.com/stories/2005/06/050607border.shtml

0 Replies

Pic of Despres. Whatcha think Whooda? Alfalfa or Jennifer Wilbanks' brother?

He should have been arrested for that hair cut alone LOL.

What's sad is this doesn't surprise me. Doesn't surprise me at all.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

possibly those very good - and quiet - German diesel submarines???

That would be one possibility besides others.

0 Replies

WhoodaThunk wrote:

McTag wrote:
WhoodaThunk wrote:
McTag wrote:
At that school, the professors piss on the kids, right? And beat some of them to death, I expect.

That was a funny joke article there.

Uh ..... no. In that school it's hot, the food sucks, & you can't pray.

It's called irony.

And they lead the kids, manacled, around with black bags over their heads, even when they have nothing to blame them for, but they might have done something? Certainly, if they were in the wrong place?

It's called sarcasm.

From the forementioned site discussing real POW abuses:

"In light of the grandstanding and posturing of certain politicians, it certain is revealing to note that our treatment of the Muslim POWs is almost gentle compared to what our American and British POWs received in some of the forced marches at the end of WWII. Add to this the recent beheading of an American civilian and our military soldiers look pretty good in my view. When one contemplates how the Japanese, Germans, Vietnamese, and the Mid-Eastern Muslims have treated POWs in the past, in order to obtain intelligence information during war times, I am amazed over the uproar and indignation caused by a few photographs of 21 year old kids trying to please their superiors who have instructed them to "sofen them up for interrogation". There are lots of torture methods worse than taking away a prisoner's clothes. Ask some of our living ex-POWs like Sen. John McCain."

It's called reality.

This argument has shifted a bit, has it not. I was commenting on the extreme tastelessness of comparing a detention camp to a boy's school. Not a very good joke.
If you want to now argue that worse things than Gitmo happened during WWII, I'm not sure of the benefit of that. Should we be pleased?

It shows how far standards have dropped, doesn't it. Who would have thought, two years ago, we would be comparing the Bush administration with the Nazis, and the US Army with the Imperial Japanese Army, 1940 and looking for comfort in the comparison.

"At least we're not as bad as these guys" is morally bereft.

0 Replies

George Galloway blasts the Senate

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know