Rex Kickass

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 03:53 PM) Yep. We "let" it happen. Uh huh. Well, what did we do to prevent this as the occupying power? I'm not talking about this specific incident, but sectarian violence in general. What kept us from enforcing a rule of law?

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 04:26 PM) At that point in time, he was okay with entering in this judgement. The appeals process is where we can re-examine the case. We do not rexamine judgement or sentencing because of second thoughts or political change in a judge. But if the appeals process allows for a death warrant to expire, the judge would by definition get to reexamine judgment by reissuing or not reissuing a judgment. And let's say its a religious decision. What if the judge said that he wouldn't be cool with putting anyone to death anymore because of it? How would you react?

QUOTE(Steff @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 04:30 PM) Cabrini today is a Disney ride from what it was 5 years ago. Just sayin.. Cabrini doesn't even really exist anymore.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 03:37 PM) Because fighting with us in Afganistan makes them a trustworthy source. The French aren't all bad is what I'm saying.

The French are fighting along side our military in Afghanistan.

And we exactly let it happen.

If the judge has changed his mind on whether the death penalty is warranted in this case, it would seem to me to be a good reason to not allow the death penalty carried out.

QUOTE(Steff @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 03:05 PM) OK. It's still a pretty big deal. And he didn't know. It's not really a big deal. This was the result of a company merger - not the sale of the ports themselves.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 02:04 PM) i dont have any impirical evidence to back up southsider2k5, but it is widely known over in Iraq that many insurgents are not iraqis anymore. iran and syria are substantial contributors, along with most other arab nations. again, i cant find anything to back it up, but i remember reading about how when an insurgent enters Iraq, their passport is taken so that they cannot leave the country and they have to stay and keep fighting even if they want to leave. They're sneaking in the country without going through a border, why wouldn't they just sneak back out?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 02:49 PM) It's absolutely not about religion. It's about fanaticism... and the clerics running everyone in a tizzy. And authoritarian governments.

So without her, he'd have had no career. But without him, neither would she.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 12:00 PM) Yea - the thing is - now the civil war junk is really starting to be pressed. It amazes me how far these "peace loving" Muslims are going to try to start the Civil War - and then blame the Americans for it, and more specifically George W. Bush. That's ok, because after that someone will try to blame Bill Clinton for it.

QUOTE(Steff @ Feb 22, 2006 -> 10:55 AM) She doesn't have a choice of the distribution in California. It's 50/50 of earnings during the time of the marriage. He should take that and run. He didn't "earn" most of that $$. If it wasn't for his marriage, neither would she.

I think these protests have so little to do with religion, its ridiculous.

I doubt it would make it through. There are too many pro choice GOP.

Or instead, we could just fund the cash necessary to upgrade port security.

I'm solely opposed to this because its a foreign government owned company.

I find it amusing that people willing to blame the administration for flimsy bunk stories about the Clinton administration's chances to get Bin Laden in 1996, aren't giving any credence to this flimsy bunk story either.

If this was a private firm, I doubt I'd have an issue. This is a company controlled by a government who helped provide Al-Qaeda funding, produced 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and has been playing both sides of the terror war. We invaded Iraq - at least partially according to the Bush administration - because of a perceived link to terror organizations. The evidence there was flimsy. Dubai supported Terrorism, still does. We let them control our ports. Makes sense to me. Bush is now saying that he didn't know about the decision beforehand and we should have told Congress about it earlier, but I'm still backing it. Makes me wonder if he's just doing this to give GOP Congressional candidates in trouble a way to distance themselves from the President.

She doesn't want him to have even that. He may be asking for this to get the half he deserves.

Sorta where I'm at. I can't respond to no posts.

He should get half! I'm gonna start a chant! Pay Nick Lachey!

I'd respond, but I don't even understand what you're saying.

Werd.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 06:10 PM) Just to make sure...you do know that this UAE company is at least partly state controlled? The CEO of that company seems to work directly for the crown prince in that country. Yes this is a state owned operation. I'm well aware of it. The same concern that led to the Chinese bid for UNOCAL not being given approval. If this was a private UAE concern, I wouldn't be so concerned.