Detained at the whim of the president



If thinking more clearly than you constitutes narrow mindedness then I wear that label proudly. In
this case narrow minded seems to mean not agreeing with you, which would be the normal reaction of
any rational person.

As to you attempt at an argument, if I agreed to the one dollar rental price then we have a
contract and that is that. If I want to change the terms after the fact you are well within your
rights to refuse. Really pretty simple if you would bother to give it any thought.

Jarg

"Nik" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> How narrow minded can you possibly be?
>
> Let me put it this way. I "rent" your car. Mail you a check of one dollar each year and your
> should be glad and happy. Well - if you cash in the
check
> I have all reason to believe that you are in fact glad and happy. If you don't and continue to
> protest and do not cash in the check you are in a
very
> different position.
>
> Nik.
>
> "Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I see, so you go to the store, pick up some merchandise, write a check
> which
> > the merchant decides not to cash. By your logic you have not paid and
are
> a
> > thief!
> >
> > Jarg
> >
> >
> > "Nik" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "The Wolf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:BBFE5E57.48D98%[email protected]...
> > > > On 12/10/2003 10:18 PM, in article
> [email protected],
> > > > "Nik" <[email protected]> opined:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > And since the good old Fidel took over power in Cuba the US hasn't
> > paid
> > > > > rent. One might actually argue that the base is occupied land.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Nik.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hey asshole, get your facts straight.
> > > >
> > > > The U.S. HAS paid the rent every year. Castro doesn't cash the
checks.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Which means that they haven't paid!
> > >
> > > Nik.
> > >
> > >
> >
>
 
"Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote:

>If thinking more clearly than you constitutes narrow mindedness then I wear that label proudly. In
>this case narrow minded seems to mean not agreeing with you, which would be the normal reaction of
>any rational person.
>
> As to you attempt at an argument, if I agreed to the one dollar rental price then we have a
> contract and that is that. If I want to change the terms after the fact you are well within your
> rights to refuse. Really pretty simple if you would bother to give it any thought.
>
>Jarg
>
That's how Judge Judy'd rule... :)

-Gord.

"I'm trying to get as old as I can,
and it must be working 'cause I'm
the oldest now that I've ever been"
 
None wrote:
>
> You need to get with the program here. By NOT presenting the "check" for payment, the Cuban
> government is stating that they no longer recognize the lease/contract.
>
> "Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I see, so you go to the store, pick up some merchandise, write a check
> which
> > the merchant decides not to cash. By your logic you have not paid and are
> a
> > thief!
> >
> > Jarg
> >
> >
> > "Nik" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "The Wolf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:BBFE5E57.48D98%[email protected]...
> > > > On 12/10/2003 10:18 PM, in article
> [email protected],
> > > > "Nik" <[email protected]> opined:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > And since the good old Fidel took over power in Cuba the US hasn't
> > paid
> > > > > rent. One might actually argue that the base is occupied land.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Nik.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hey asshole, get your facts straight.
> > > >
> > > > The U.S. HAS paid the rent every year. Castro doesn't cash the checks.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Which means that they haven't paid!
> > >
> > > Nik.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >

The recognition of the contract is not up to the Cuban government. There is a 1903 treaty ammended
in 1934 that both parties must recognize.

There is lots of misinformation on this. I have even heard that the Cuban government claims the
lease has a time limit of 99 years. I don't know what this is based on since I have not read the
agreement and ammendment. Perhaps I should.

From http://www.mysafeharbor.org/gitmo.htm

<quote> In February 1903, the United States agreed to lease 45 square miles of land and water at
Guantanamo Bay for use as a coaling station. The treaty was finalized and the document was ratified
by both governments and signed in Havana in December of that year. A 1934 treaty reaffirming the
lease granted Cuba and her trading partners free access through the bay, modified the lease payment
from $2,000 in gold coins per year, to the 1934 equivalent value of $4,085 U.S. Treasury Dollars,
and added a requirement that termination of the lease requires the consent of both the U.S. and Cuba
governments, or the abandonment of the base property by the U.S. <unquote>

Bert
 
"Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote:

>But let's hope it doesn't come to that! ;)
>
>Jarg
>
Why not?...hell, Judge Judy rules!...

-Gord.

"I'm trying to get as old as I can,
and it must be working 'cause I'm
the oldest now that I've ever been"
 
But let's hope it doesn't come to that! ;)

Jarg

"Gord Beaman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >If thinking more clearly than you constitutes narrow mindedness then I
wear
> >that label proudly. In this case narrow minded seems to mean not
agreeing
> >with you, which would be the normal reaction of any rational person.
> >
> > As to you attempt at an argument, if I agreed to the one dollar rental price then we have a
> > contract and that is that. If I want to change the terms after the fact you are well within your
> > rights to refuse. Really pretty simple if you would bother to give it any thought.
> >
> >Jarg
> >
> That's how Judge Judy'd rule... :)
>
> -Gord.
>
> "I'm trying to get as old as I can,
> and it must be working 'cause I'm
> the oldest now that I've ever been"
 
If your examples are so far fetched as the one you suggest with the grocery store then...

Nik

"Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If thinking more clearly than you constitutes narrow mindedness then I
wear
> that label proudly. In this case narrow minded seems to mean not agreeing with you, which would be
> the normal reaction of any rational person.
>
> As to you attempt at an argument, if I agreed to the one dollar rental price then we have a
> contract and that is that. If I want to change the terms after the fact you are well within your
> rights to refuse. Really pretty simple if you would bother to give it any thought.
>
> Jarg
>
> "Nik" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > How narrow minded can you possibly be?
> >
> > Let me put it this way. I "rent" your car. Mail you a check of one
dollar
> > each year and your should be glad and happy. Well - if you cash in the
> check
> > I have all reason to believe that you are in fact glad and happy. If you don't and continue to
> > protest and do not cash in the check you are in a
> very
> > different position.
> >
> > Nik.
> >
> > "Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > I see, so you go to the store, pick up some merchandise, write a check
> > which
> > > the merchant decides not to cash. By your logic you have not paid and
> are
> > a
> > > thief!
> > >
> > > Jarg
> > >
> > >
> > > "Nik" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > "The Wolf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:BBFE5E57.48D98%[email protected]...
> > > > > On 12/10/2003 10:18 PM, in article
> > [email protected],
> > > > > "Nik" <[email protected]> opined:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And since the good old Fidel took over power in Cuba the US
hasn't
> > > paid
> > > > > > rent. One might actually argue that the base is occupied land.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nik.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey asshole, get your facts straight.
> > > > >
> > > > > The U.S. HAS paid the rent every year. Castro doesn't cash the
> checks.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Which means that they haven't paid!
> > > >
> > > > Nik.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
 
RogerM wrote:

>
>
> None wrote:
>
> >
> > I laugh at your nonsense. Just because a so called lease exists doesn't mean the U.S. government
> > can lay claim to the lands and tenements of another country. Whether or not the Gitmo irritates
> > Castro or not, the land still belongs to Cuba and if they want to break the lease, they can. You
> > seem to be implying that U.S. law extends to Cuba, I assure you, it does not. If the lease calls
> > for payment in gold, and the U.S. sends a check, then they are, and have been in breach of
> > contract for years and rightfully, Cuba could easily evict them and abandon the "lease".
> >
>
> How, exactly could Cuba enforce that eviction notice?
>
They tried that before when they cut off Gitmo's water. The U.S. built desalinization plants.
 
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:36:17 GMT, blake murphy <[email protected]>
wrote:

>>>maybe it would be nice to see george elected once.
>>>
>>>your pal, blake
>>
>>Blake we already saw that once, wen't you watching : 0
>>
>>Pan Ohco
>
>sure, george bush won fair and square, five to four.
>
>your pal, blake

Check the count of the electoral college. And discontinue the big lie. ; )

Pan Ohco
 
earth to pan......................george was appointed.............................

--
rosie ([email protected])

the main reason Santa is so jolly is because he knows where all the bad girls live.
................................ anonymous


"Pan Ohco" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:36:17 GMT, blake murphy
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> >>>maybe it would be nice to see george elected once.
> >>>
> >>>your pal, blake
> >>
> >>Blake we already saw that once, wen't you watching : 0
> >>
> >>Pan Ohco
> >
> >sure, george bush won fair and square, five to four.
> >
> >your pal, blake
>
> Check the count of the electoral college. And discontinue the big lie. ; )
>
>
> Pan Ohco
 
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 16:51:14 GMT, "rosie" <[email protected]> wrote:

>earth to pan......................george was appointed.............................
We was, by who? Do a little reading. George Bush won in the electoral college, as required by the
constitution. You bought into the big lie, like a lot of others. The democrats love you. Pan Ohco
 
In rec.food.cooking The Wolf <[email protected]> wrote:

> Come on! Even for you that's out in left field.

Yeh, you extreme conservatives have a lot of trouble dealing with reality.
 
On 12/20/2003 5:39 AM, in article [email protected],
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> opined:

> In rec.food.cooking The Wolf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Come on! Even for you that's out in left field.
>
> Yeh, you extreme conservatives have a lot of trouble dealing with reality.
>
It's been so long I forget what you said.

Refresh my memory.
--
========================================================
I'd rather have a German division ahead of me then a French division behind me," Gen.
George S. Patton
========================================================
 
In rec.food.cooking None <[email protected]> wrote:
> You need to get with the program here. By NOT presenting the "check" for payment, the Cuban
> government is stating that they no longer recognize the lease/contract.

Perhaps, but that still does not nullify the lease.
 
Pan Ohco <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 16:51:14 GMT, "rosie" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>earth to pan......................george was appointed.............................
> We was, by who? Do a little reading. George Bush won in the electoral college, as required by the
> constitution.

But the USSC decided who got Florida's electors, not the people of Florida. Even so, in the popular
vote, no matter how you count the votes, Gore won. The popular vote, of course, does not determine
who gets to be President, but it is a major indicator of how the people think about the candidates.
 
On 12/20/2003 5:35 AM, in article [email protected],
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> opined:

> In rec.food.cooking None <[email protected]> wrote:
>> You need to get with the program here. By NOT presenting the "check" for payment, the Cuban
>> government is stating that they no longer recognize the lease/contract.
>
> Perhaps, but that still does not nullify the lease.
>

The Bush Administration got hammered twice on detainees by Federal Appeals Court.

The Padilla one I agree with since he IS a citizen and WAS apprehended on U.S. Soil.

The other I'm not so sure about, the Supreme Court will decide. That's why our system works checks
and balences.

Surprised you're not dancing around like New Year's Eve anytime the Bush administration loses in
court..................................
--
=======================================================================
The principal difference between genius and stupidity is that there are limits to genius!
=======================================================================
 
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 10:48:34 -0600, Pan Ohco <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:36:17 GMT, blake murphy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>>>maybe it would be nice to see george elected once.
>>>>
>>>>your pal, blake
>>>
>>>Blake we already saw that once, wen't you watching : 0
>>>
>>>Pan Ohco
>>
>>sure, george bush won fair and square, five to four.
>>
>>your pal, blake
>
>Check the count of the electoral college. And discontinue the big lie. ; )
>
>
>Pan Ohco

let's just say it wasn't a 'mandate' let alone a 'landslide.'

your pal, blake
 
~consul wrote:

> john wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 19:36:32 +1000, Craig Welch <[email protected]=
>
> > The fact of the matter is that the US and Great Britain supplied 99% of the troops in Iraq.
>
> The US and GB always supply the highest # of troops in any UN event. Th=
at's why
> the other nations don't bother to.
>

That is not at all accurate. The US has provided a lot of troops and equi= pment for the actions
which it pushed, like Korea, and the UN sanctioned coalition = in the Gulf War, but as far as the
majority of UN peacekeeping operations, the US is = hardly even a player. From the UN's web site:
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/ques.htm

5. Who contributes personnel?

The United Nations Charter stipulates that to assist in maintaining peace= and security around the
world, all Member States of the UN should make availa= ble to the Security Council necessary armed
forces and facilities. Since 1948, close= to 130 nations have contributed military and civilian
police personnel to peace = operations.

As of 1 October 2003, 91 countries were contributing a total of some 42,7= 46 personnel, including
36,584 troops, 4,435 civilian police and 1,727 milit= ary observers.As of 1 October 2003, the five
main troop-contributing countrie= s were Pakistan (5,252), Bangladesh (4,778), India (2,922), Ghana
(2,254) and Ur= uguay (1,800).

Of the 42,746 troops and civilian police serving in UN peace operations, = only 3,209 come from the
European Union and only 430 from the United States (416 civ= ilian police and 14 military
observers).

Although 91 Member States contribute to current UN peacekeeping operation= s, the greatest burden in
the form of troops is borne by a core group of develop= ing countries. Noting a hesitancy on the
part of developed countries to commi= t their troops to UN peacekeeping missions, in March 2003 the
UN senior peacekeep= er, Jean-Marie Gu=E9henno, Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operation=
s, reminded Member States that =93the provision of well-equipped, well-trained and di= sciplined
military and police personnel to UN peacekeeping operations is a collecti= ve responsibility of
Member States. Countries from the South should not and = must not be expected to shoulder this
burden alone=94.
 
On 20 Dec 2003 13:38:28 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>Pan Ohco <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 16:51:14 GMT, "rosie" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>earth to pan......................george was appointed.............................
>> We was, by who? Do a little reading. George Bush won in the electoral college, as required by the
>> constitution.
>
>But the USSC decided who got Florida's electors, not the people of Florida. Even so, in the popular
>vote, no matter how you count the votes, Gore won. The popular vote, of course, does not determine
>who gets to be President, but it is a major indicator of how the people think about the candidates.

Oh come on Stan. The court did not decide that and you know that. They decided to stop the
additional recounts.

And a number of news agency s did a recount after the election and all (liberal and conservative)
stated that Bush got the votes.

It has been over three years now and you still haven't done the research? I think not. You are just
continuing the Big Lie. I know that you can't stand Bush, but that doesn't condone the lie.

Pan Ohco
 
Dave Smith <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Although 91 Member States contribute to current UN peacekeeping operations, the greatest burden
> in the form of troops is borne by a core group of developing countries. Noting a hesitancy on the
> part of developed countries to commit their troops to UN peacekeeping missions, in March 2003 the
> UN senior peacekeeper, Jean-Marie Guéhenno, Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations,
> reminded Member States that “the provision of well-equipped, well-trained and disciplined
> military and police personnel to UN peacekeeping operations is a collective responsibility of
> Member States. Countries from the South should not and must not be expected to shoulder this
> burden alone”.

This is a recent development. Until it was forced by NATO obligations to take over a good portion of
ground-based peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan (2000 personnel), Canada was holding down 10% of
UN peacekeeping operations worldwide. The RCMP is also called upon regularly to help train
developing nations' police.

CF still has 1200 on the ground in Bosnia for a total of more than 3400 engaged in overseas
operations while our armed forces are shrinking, and another 8000 are in the rotation process on any
given day, training, moving and returning. This does not include support personnel at home.

Other than current operations, Canadian Forces have completed 72 international operations since
1947. Overall Canada is the first and longest standing still contributor to UN peacekeeping
operations, seeing as peacekeping was proposed by the Canadian government as a resolution to the
Suez Canal crisis in 1956.

--
"The problem with the French is they have no word for entrepreneur."

attributed to George W. Bush by Tony Blair via Baroness Williams
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back