[extropy-chat] Re: Iraq and legality again

[Samantha Atkins]

On Jun 26, 2005, at 6:00 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
>
>> If I was Iraqi I would almost certainly be in the resistance and   
>> consider those cops turncoats to their own people.
>>
>
> Samantha, like you I am concerned for the Iraqi's but unlike you
> I am not a citizen of the United States of America.
> Isn't the Constitution of the United States of America, every last
> clause of it, *yours*?

Yes and no.  The Constitution is a partially flawed document  
attempting to set up and perpetuate a free republic (not a  
democracy).   Its intent is more important than legalistic arguments  
about its clauses.

>
> Do you think you own fully enough what is *yours*? Do you
> understand the powerful social system that is your inheritance
> and at your disposal and has as its basis the US Constitution?
>

Freedom is deeper and more fundamental than the Constitution.  But  
yes, basically.

> Please read Mike's post that points out that treaties duly ratified
> are part of US law. I would like to discuss it and I would like
> to discuss it with you as well.

I do not agree with this notion.  If it is fully backed by the  
Constitution then this is a place the Constitution is flawed imho.

> Before I return to my planned days work let me make one final
> point Samantha. "Believing" was what the US President and his
> allies claimed to be doing when they went into Iraq to find weapons  
> of mass destruction.

Sorry but I believe the evidence is sufficient to conclude he knew  
better.

> Believing at least strongly suggests a faith based view and  
> professing belief in an emotionally charged discussion is like  
> calling for others, perhaps even followers, to  answer with their
> hearts and not be concerned much with the hesitancy that might
> be the good counsel of their heads.

I have no idea what you are attempting to say.  On the face of the  
evidnece I very much doubt Bush believed there was significant WMD in  
Iraq.

> One day I hope you might choose to express your moral concerns,  
> your humanity and your convictions without invoking
> "believing".

Oh, this tired old hobby horse again.  Please stay with the relevant  
points.

>
> Head and heart should proceed together. We have seen what
> happens when they do not.
> Your words are yours to choose.

What you pay attention to is yours to choose.  I don't find this  
choice very relevant or useful.

- s

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050627/ce87d428/attachment.html>