Re: Firefox is on its way out

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
193 messages Options
1 ... 345678910
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

clay-14
Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 28.04.2009 12:02, clay wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> On 28.04.2009 11:05, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>
>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> but "I" wasn't in Beaumont this past weekend, I was in East
>>>>> Jefferson Hospital since Thursday afternoon - Sunday evening. I'm
>>>>> not the one arguing, you're the one making all these allegations,
>>>>> I'm just answering 'em. If you quit, I'll quit and leave everyone
>>>>> guessing as to exactly WHAT happened this weekend. :-D
>>>>
>>>> Liposuction?  Tijuana is cheaper!
>>>>
>>>
>>> TIA but was actually diagnosed as an anxiety attack or two. Ain't no
>>> fun regardless.
>>>
>>
>> I hate that feeling when the heart does a big ol' ca thump in my
>> chest... almost feels like it's flipping over.
>> Hold my breath, waiting to see if it's going to beat normal again.
>
> No problem with the ticker,

Glad to hear it.

it was that tunnel-vision that came and went
> ... and came and went ... and ... :-)

I see... *g*
liposuction won't fix that.
get well.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Jay Garcia
In reply to this post by squaredancer
On 28.04.2009 14:36, squaredancer wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> On 28.04.2009 17:15, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Jay Garcia to
> generate the following:? :
>> On 28.04.2009 04:46, squaredancer wrote:
>>
>>   --- Original Message ---
>>
>>  
>>> On 27.04.2009 22:35, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Ron Hunter
>>> to generate the following:? :
>>>    
>>>> Phillip Jones wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>      
>>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>> On 27.04.2009 04:04, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>>              
>>>>>>> On 26.04.2009 23:07, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Jay
>>>>>>> Garcia to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>> On 26.04.2009 11:56, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   --- Original Message ---
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>>> nothing against the poor sods who get their ass kicked in those
>>>>>>>>> places - but as you would surely agree - (your....) god's will
>>>>>>>>> be done!
>>>>>>>>>                                
>>>>>>>> Yah, like you guys in the red coats got your asses kicked outta
>>>>>>>> here!! God's will was done ya'all! :-D
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                          
>>>>>>> well - as I taught you lot many-a-time.... history says that the
>>>>>>> american colony didn't want independance, so we had to /fight/  
>>>>>>> our way out....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> amen!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> reg
>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>> Was speaking of the Battle (rout) of New Orleans bubba! Tea and
>>>>>> Crumpets don't make it here! :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                
>>>>> John Horton had a famous song describing the battle.
>>>>> Yea ....they ran through Bramble and Bushes ....
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> They ran through the briars, and they ran through the brambles, and
>>>> they ran through the bushes where a rabbit couldn't go...
>>>> Note this battle took place MONTHS after the end of the war.  Darn
>>>> strange.
>>>>        
>>> also note:
>>> so we hid behind our cotton bales
>>> and never said a thing...
>>>
>>> as I keep trying to educate you lot - the brits wanted OUT - the
>>> americans didn't want us to go.... bloody stoopid squirrel hunters!
>>>
>>> reg
>>>    
>>
>> The ONLY reason we wanted you to say was so that we could have more
>> target practice. :-D
>>
>>  
>
> bahhhhh :-P
>
>
> reg

Was supposed to be " ... wanted you to stay ... " ... but your reply was
right on ... ;-)


--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Jay Garcia
In reply to this post by clay-14
On 28.04.2009 15:12, clay wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> liposuction won't fix that.

Well, it will but the procedure will affect your eyesight. 8-)

--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Moz Champion (Dan)
In reply to this post by squaredancer
squaredancer wrote:

> On 28.04.2009 05:14, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Leonidas Jones
> to generate the following:? :
>> user wrote:
>>  
>>>> On 26.04.2009 05:20, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  user to
>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>      
>>>>>> On 4/25/2009 5:54 PM, user wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>>> Why, if the shoe fits .... Is mentioning Madelein Murray O'Hare
>>>>>>>>> uncalled
>>>>>>>>> for as well??? And besides, after reading these groups back a
>>>>>>>>> ways, it
>>>>>>>>> seems my "call" is correct.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /xo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>> "/xo = Xavier Ochoa - Beaumont, Tx."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guess that explains it!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>> I would think it does, yes. People like him are usually a
>>>>>>> giveaway. He
>>>>>>> comes across as quite self-centered, thinks everyone should
>>>>>>> follow his
>>>>>>> lead. Being a non-believer in a diety higher than himself is right
>>>>>>> inline IMHO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Xavier
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>            
>>>>>> You sure missed my point!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>          
>>>>> Well, I thought you may be going in a certain direction with that
>>>>> comment but I said, nah, he wouldn't do that .. did you? So just
>>>>> what IS
>>>>> your point with that comment? I am a Vietnam Vet that fought for our
>>>>> country, USA. Now tell us, just where were you going Irwin?
>>>>>
>>>>> Xavier
>>>>>
>>>>>        
>>>> YOU tell MEE (I speak with a "bloody terrible" german accent) exactly
>>>> how you fought for the US of A in VIETNAM ??  What the hell where you
>>>> doing there in the first place, huh???
>>>>
>>>> reg
>>>>      
>>> You never heard of Vietnam and the US of A presence there??
>>>
>>> Helicopter pilot rescuing downed airmen, that's what. You have a problem
>>> with that? At least I wasn't crossing into Canada burning my draft card.
>>> What I thought maybe that Irwin was alluding to was my "name/ethinic
>>> origin" and/or my "location".
>>>
>>> Bye, headed out.
>>>
>>> Xavier
>>>    
>>
>> I have to say, this thread is not a high point in our discussions
>> here. I am rather embarrassed on our behalf.
>>
>> Lee
>>  
>
> sorry, Lee, but it makes my hair rise when "heroes" praise the act of
> war - in a country that they had no place to be in to start with and -
> what's just as bad - a country that the majority of those "heroes" don't
> even know where in the world it is!
> I do not consider them to be heroes - they are non-thinking political
> puppets.
>
> reg



A soldier goes where (and when) his leaders dictate. He doesn't get to
choose, all he can do is do his duty. If such duty dictates that he
perform 'heroic' acts, the place of such is still not of his choosing.

The German sailors who went to sea on U-boats were not all 'political
puppets' of the Nazi's, they were proud citizens ot the Fatherland,
fighting for their country.

Was the German soldier who fought the Russians 'better' somehow than the
ones who fought in Normandy, or in North Africa, simply because it is
somehow 'okay' to fight against communism?

Case in point.
In 1964, Canadian troops went to Cyprus at the behest of the UN. It was
not their choice to be placed between warring Turks and Greeks, it was
the governments.
In 1974, Canadian troops found themselves in a shooting war with Turkish
forces when they invaded the island. Once again, it wasn't the troops
decision, they were they because they had been ordered there to keep the
peace. There were several 'heroes' in any case.
In 1993, Canadian troops were recalled from Cyprus, as Canada ended it's
commitment to the UN presence there. Regardless of how the troops felt
about it, they went home.

The German and Canadian troops now serving in Afghanistan are not
necessarily 'believers' that they should be there, they are there simply
because their respective governments gave them that duty.

A soldier doesn't get to choose, he goes where his Government sends him,
for better or worse, regardless of the morals or ethics involved.
A soldier doesn't get to choose the path of least resistance... such as
"I don't think I will rescue my buddies today... because we shouldn't be
here in the first place" or some other effete nonsense.

A soldier gives up freedom of choice when he joins the military. The
military simply doesn't 'work' with 'thinking' soldiers who get to make
their own decisions, regardless of what their leaders think.

I, for one, was proud to serve my country, tho, for all the years in
service never once was the party I voted for in power.  Regardless if I
believed that we should be in Cyprus or not, I went there. Regardless if
I WANTED to be shot at by Turks, I was there.  I was there in Norway,
involved in 'exercises' to test NATO's Northern Flank commitments
against the Russians.  And two of the aircraft I launched did a real
time 'live' intercept of a Russian Bear (Tupolov Tu 95)
I was there in Germany, on operational status, when the wall came down,
whether I wanted to be or not.  I was there guarding a prison in New
Westminister British Columbia, when the guards couldn't contain a riot.

Canadian troops have been part of every single UN peacekeeping mission
since 1947. No one asks the troops if they believe in this mission or
that, they go because they are following orders.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Moz Champion (Dan)
In reply to this post by squaredancer
squaredancer wrote:

> On 28.04.2009 17:15, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Jay Garcia to
> generate the following:? :
>> On 28.04.2009 02:56, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>
>>   --- Original Message ---
>>
>>  
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>      
>>>>> Irwin Greenwald wrote:
>>>>>        
>>>>>> On 4/27/2009 11:57 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>> On 27.04.2009 13:51, Irwin Greenwald wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    --- Original Message ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>            
>>>>>>>> On 4/26/2009 5:11 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately I think I got your point and I think so did
>>>>>>>>> Xavier. Ethnic
>>>>>>>>> racial overtone if I ever saw one, unless of course you'd like to
>>>>>>>>> explain.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>> Actually it was geographical bigotry.  And I'm sure you know
>>>>>>>> what Xavier
>>>>>>>> thinks!!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Irwin
>>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>> No idea what he thinks but being from the same ethnic background
>>>>>>> I can
>>>>>>> imagine. You have something against people from Texas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>            
>>>>>> I do not think it is unusual for many Texans to be bigoted about
>>>>>> religious questions and sexual preference questions.
>>>>>>          
>>>>> No, it isn't, but you find that mostly in the areas of east, and
>>>>> southeast Texas, NOT in the civilized parts.
>>>>>        
>>>> That depends if you call Houston and Dallas civilized doesn't it?
>>>>      
>>> More so than Beaumont, or Longview.  Houston has pretty much lost its
>>> identity with so many people coming in from all parts of the world,
>>> and Dallas still aspires to be New York City, and fails miserably.
>>>    
>>
>> Fair to say that most every city in the U.S. has it's own uncivilized
>> population.
>>
>>  
>
> reckon it's true world-wide.... not an american privilege, ya know!
>
> reg

Naw, in Canada, we don't have any uncivilized population. Doesn't
prevent people from imitating Americans or Germsns or even Texans tho <grin>

We are civilized people who act uncivilized at times <grin>
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

JoeS-3
In reply to this post by Moz Champion (Dan)
On 4/28/2009 6:45 PM, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> A soldier gives up freedom of choice when he joins the military. The
> military simply doesn't 'work' with 'thinking' soldiers who get to make
> their own decisions, regardless of what their leaders think.

Yes, but there is always a bottom line in what an individual will do, or not do.
Nazi soldiers in WWII can't make the claim "I was only doing what I was told"
In any voluntary act "thinking" is required.

> I, for one, was proud to serve my country, tho, for all the years in
> service never once was the party I voted for in power.  Regardless if I
> believed that we should be in Cyprus or not, I went there. Regardless if
> I WANTED to be shot at by Turks, I was there.  I was there in Norway,
> involved in 'exercises' to test NATO's Northern Flank commitments
> against the Russians.  And two of the aircraft I launched did a real
> time 'live' intercept of a Russian Bear (Tupolov Tu 95)
> I was there in Germany, on operational status, when the wall came down,
> whether I wanted to be or not.  I was there guarding a prison in New
> Westminister British Columbia, when the guards couldn't contain a riot.

I served for three years Regular Army US 1964-1966 and I was lucky.
Could have gone to Viet-Nam but instead spent a year in Korea.

I often think of how lucky I was, not having to endure those very trying personal decisions.
God bless those that did. Without any reward or even appreciation.
That was a bad time in our (United States) military history.

JoeS
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Ron Hunter
JoeS wrote:

> On 4/28/2009 6:45 PM, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> A soldier gives up freedom of choice when he joins the military. The
>> military simply doesn't 'work' with 'thinking' soldiers who get to make
>> their own decisions, regardless of what their leaders think.
>
> Yes, but there is always a bottom line in what an individual will do, or not do.
> Nazi soldiers in WWII can't make the claim "I was only doing what I was told"
> In any voluntary act "thinking" is required.
>
>> I, for one, was proud to serve my country, tho, for all the years in
>> service never once was the party I voted for in power.  Regardless if I
>> believed that we should be in Cyprus or not, I went there. Regardless if
>> I WANTED to be shot at by Turks, I was there.  I was there in Norway,
>> involved in 'exercises' to test NATO's Northern Flank commitments
>> against the Russians.  And two of the aircraft I launched did a real
>> time 'live' intercept of a Russian Bear (Tupolov Tu 95)
>> I was there in Germany, on operational status, when the wall came down,
>> whether I wanted to be or not.  I was there guarding a prison in New
>> Westminister British Columbia, when the guards couldn't contain a riot.
>
> I served for three years Regular Army US 1964-1966 and I was lucky.
> Could have gone to Viet-Nam but instead spent a year in Korea.
>
> I often think of how lucky I was, not having to endure those very trying personal decisions.
> God bless those that did. Without any reward or even appreciation.
> That was a bad time in our (United States) military history.
>
> JoeS

It was, and I served from 1964-1968.  Most people didn't want to go to
Viet Nam, and really didn't feel any great commitment to the cause of
South Viet Nam, but rather to the attempt to stop communism from
expanding to yet another friendly country.  The gutless wonders in
Congress, and the liberal 'pinko' press resulted in an ignominious
defeat there, and for that, I will always distrust them.  Those of us
who were ridiculed, and spat upon when we returned will never forget,
and that is why you see so many cases of great respect being given to
our returning troops these days.  We won't forget, and we won't let that
happen again in our lifetimes.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Moz Champion (Dan)
In reply to this post by JoeS-3
JoeS wrote:

> On 4/28/2009 6:45 PM, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> A soldier gives up freedom of choice when he joins the military. The
>> military simply doesn't 'work' with 'thinking' soldiers who get to make
>> their own decisions, regardless of what their leaders think.
>
> Yes, but there is always a bottom line in what an individual will do, or
> not do.
> Nazi soldiers in WWII can't make the claim "I was only doing what I was
> told"
> In any voluntary act "thinking" is required.
>
>> I, for one, was proud to serve my country, tho, for all the years in
>> service never once was the party I voted for in power.  Regardless if I
>> believed that we should be in Cyprus or not, I went there. Regardless if
>> I WANTED to be shot at by Turks, I was there.  I was there in Norway,
>> involved in 'exercises' to test NATO's Northern Flank commitments
>> against the Russians.  And two of the aircraft I launched did a real
>> time 'live' intercept of a Russian Bear (Tupolov Tu 95)
>> I was there in Germany, on operational status, when the wall came down,
>> whether I wanted to be or not.  I was there guarding a prison in New
>> Westminister British Columbia, when the guards couldn't contain a riot.
>
> I served for three years Regular Army US 1964-1966 and I was lucky.
> Could have gone to Viet-Nam but instead spent a year in Korea.
>
> I often think of how lucky I was, not having to endure those very trying
> personal decisions.
> God bless those that did. Without any reward or even appreciation.
> That was a bad time in our (United States) military history.
>
> JoeS


'thinking' soldiers can think but only within certain confines. They
still cannot 'choose' where they go or what duty they must perform.

Case in point: The My Lai massacre in which US troops shot and killed at
least 347 (some reports up to 504 with My Khe) Vietnamese, including
women and children.

28 Soldiers were initially charged with offences, but only one
conviction was ever made, the Commanding Officer of one platoon Second
Lt. William
Calley. He was initially sentenced to life in prison, but with
Presidential intervention he actually only served 4 and one half months.

So ' I was following orders' is still an effective defence, at least in
some circles.

I served in the military post My Lai. Our concession to that conundrum
was the rule that if you disagreed with an order (on whatever grounds)
you could state such when given it, and would have the chance to put it
in writing if so required (if and when possible), but you still had to
follow it. In the middle of combat, you are expected to do your duty.
If you believed the order to be 'illegal' and refused to follow it, you
would have a chance to defend yourself at your court martial. (if in
combat you would probably be shot offhand anyway)

Today, the US (and many other countries) have all volunteer military s
(Canada hasn't had conscription since World War Two). The 'choice' a
person makes to join the military is basically the LAST time he has
complete freedom of choice for his actions.  You can't join the military
and then decide Iraq (or where-ever) is not what you signed up for, as
an example. You gave up that right when you signed up.  Even if you
thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't have a choice.

Several Canadian soldiers tried to capitalize on 'anti-war' feelings
during Operation Desert Shield (and the later Desert Storm). They
refused their orders to be deployed to the Middle East, and went public
about it.  They were charged with insubordination, and told, point
blank, that if they refused to get on the plane/ship taking them there,
it would be treated as desertion in the face of the enemy.  In the end,
they were replaced by others (most Canadian troops wanted to go) and
released with dishonourable discharges.  There is no place in a modern
military for those who refuse to follow legitimate orders.


In short, regardless that after the war, "I was following orders" may or
may not get you off, the choice is not yours, you gave up that choice
when you volunteered.

In the case of conscripts that choice was never yours in the first
place, it was the 'cost' of living in that country

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

»Q«
In <news:[hidden email]>,
"Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Even if you thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't have a choice.

WRT foreign soldiers, Canadian courts seem split on that issue.  Asylum
was granted to an Iraqi soldier who refused to participate in the
illegal invasion of Kuwait, but later not to an American one who
refused to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq.

> In short, regardless that after the war, "I was following orders" may
> or may not get you off, the choice is not yours, you gave up that
> choice  when you volunteered.

In the U.S. military, orders must be followed unless they're illegal,
and the simple fact that they're superior orders means the soldier must
infer that they're legal unless they're obviously not.  IIRC the bar
for deciding that they're not legal is that they be "patently illegal",
but I'm not going digging through the UCMJ for it, heh.

--
»Q«                                                              /"\
                                      ASCII Ribbon Campaign      \ /
                                       against html e-mail        X
                                     <http://asciiribbon.org/>   / \
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Moz Champion (Dan)
»Q« wrote:
> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Even if you thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't have a choice.
>
> WRT foreign soldiers, Canadian courts seem split on that issue.  Asylum
> was granted to an Iraqi soldier who refused to participate in the
> illegal invasion of Kuwait, but later not to an American one who
> refused to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq.

The Iraqi soldier who deserted faced possible execution under the laws
of Iraq. The American soldiers did not.  Under international customs, a
person can claim refugee status if they fear prosecution and death if
they return to their native country. While American soldiers might be
punished for going AWOL, they would not be executed for it. The maximum
U.S. penalty for desertion in wartime remains death, although this
punishment was last applied to Eddie Slovik in 1945. No US serviceman
has received more than 18 months imprisonment for desertion or missing
movement during the Iraq war

'Refugee' status may be granted to anyone who has a legitimate fear of
death if they are returned to their native country

>
>> In short, regardless that after the war, "I was following orders" may
>> or may not get you off, the choice is not yours, you gave up that
>> choice  when you volunteered.
>
> In the U.S. military, orders must be followed unless they're illegal,
> and the simple fact that they're superior orders means the soldier must
> infer that they're legal unless they're obviously not.  IIRC the bar
> for deciding that they're not legal is that they be "patently illegal",
> but I'm not going digging through the UCMJ for it, heh.
>

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

»Q«
In <news:[hidden email]>,
"Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> »Q« wrote:
> > In <news:[hidden email]>,
> > "Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >  
> >> Even if you thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't
> >> have a choice.  
> >
> > WRT foreign soldiers, Canadian courts seem split on that issue.
> > Asylum was granted to an Iraqi soldier who refused to participate
> > in the illegal invasion of Kuwait, but later not to an American one
> > who refused to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq.  
>
> The Iraqi soldier who deserted faced possible execution under the
> laws of Iraq. The American soldiers did not.  Under international
> customs, a person can claim refugee status if they fear prosecution
> and death if they return to their native country. While American
> soldiers might be punished for going AWOL, they would not be executed
> for it. The maximum U.S. penalty for desertion in wartime remains
> death, although this punishment was last applied to Eddie Slovik in
> 1945. No US serviceman has received more than 18 months imprisonment
> for desertion or missing movement during the Iraq war

This explains much.  The USA hasn't actually declared war in an awfully
long time, and I don't even know if "desertion in wartime" would
apply.  Even if so, there's no way a deserter could reasonably fear
that maximum penalty might be applied.

--
»Q«
     Kleeneness is next to Gödelness.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

user-41
In reply to this post by »Q«
On 4/28/2009 7:29 PM, »Q« wrote:
>
>
> In the U.S. military, orders must be followed unless they're illegal,
> and the simple fact that they're superior orders means the soldier must
> infer that they're legal unless they're obviously not.  IIRC the bar
> for deciding that they're not legal is that they be "patently illegal",
> but I'm not going digging through the UCMJ for it, heh.
>

Also when in a foreign country even as a soldier you are subject to the
laws of that country (if caught), i.e. murder (of unarmed non
combatants) is still murder. I'm sure the UCMJ has probably been updated
but that is the way it was.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by »Q«
»Q« wrote:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Even if you thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't have a choice.
>
> WRT foreign soldiers, Canadian courts seem split on that issue.  Asylum
> was granted to an Iraqi soldier who refused to participate in the
> illegal invasion of Kuwait, but later not to an American one who
> refused to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq.
>
>> In short, regardless that after the war, "I was following orders" may
>> or may not get you off, the choice is not yours, you gave up that
>> choice  when you volunteered.
>
> In the U.S. military, orders must be followed unless they're illegal,
> and the simple fact that they're superior orders means the soldier must
> infer that they're legal unless they're obviously not.  IIRC the bar
> for deciding that they're not legal is that they be "patently illegal",
> but I'm not going digging through the UCMJ for it, heh.
>
The best protection when given an order that is likely to result in some
kind of prosecution is to request it in writing.  I used that provision
only once, and got out of it without repercussions.  Had I followed it,
thousands of military and civilian payroll checks would have gone out
incorrect.  The officer later apologized in front of the office.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by »Q«
»Q« wrote:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> »Q« wrote:
>>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
>>> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>  
>>>> Even if you thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't
>>>> have a choice.  
>>> WRT foreign soldiers, Canadian courts seem split on that issue.
>>> Asylum was granted to an Iraqi soldier who refused to participate
>>> in the illegal invasion of Kuwait, but later not to an American one
>>> who refused to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq.  
>> The Iraqi soldier who deserted faced possible execution under the
>> laws of Iraq. The American soldiers did not.  Under international
>> customs, a person can claim refugee status if they fear prosecution
>> and death if they return to their native country. While American
>> soldiers might be punished for going AWOL, they would not be executed
>> for it. The maximum U.S. penalty for desertion in wartime remains
>> death, although this punishment was last applied to Eddie Slovik in
>> 1945. No US serviceman has received more than 18 months imprisonment
>> for desertion or missing movement during the Iraq war
>
> This explains much.  The USA hasn't actually declared war in an awfully
> long time, and I don't even know if "desertion in wartime" would
> apply.  Even if so, there's no way a deserter could reasonably fear
> that maximum penalty might be applied.
>
If one ran in the face of enemy fire, and resulted in the death of his
fellow soldiers, then I suspect that death penalty would be applied, and
promptly, on the field.  VERY bad form.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

squaredancer
In reply to this post by Moz Champion (Dan)
On 29.04.2009 01:07, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion
(Dan) to generate the following:? :

> squaredancer wrote:
>  
>> On 28.04.2009 17:15, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Jay Garcia to
>> generate the following:? :
>>    
>>> On 28.04.2009 02:56, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>
>>>   --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>  
>>>      
>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Irwin Greenwald wrote:
>>>>>>        
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>> On 4/27/2009 11:57 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>> On 27.04.2009 13:51, Irwin Greenwald wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    --- Original Message ---
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>            
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>> On 4/26/2009 5:11 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately I think I got your point and I think so did
>>>>>>>>>> Xavier. Ethnic
>>>>>>>>>> racial overtone if I ever saw one, unless of course you'd like to
>>>>>>>>>> explain.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>>>>> Actually it was geographical bigotry.  And I'm sure you know
>>>>>>>>> what Xavier
>>>>>>>>> thinks!!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Irwin
>>>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>> No idea what he thinks but being from the same ethnic background
>>>>>>>> I can
>>>>>>>> imagine. You have something against people from Texas?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>            
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>> I do not think it is unusual for many Texans to be bigoted about
>>>>>>> religious questions and sexual preference questions.
>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>> No, it isn't, but you find that mostly in the areas of east, and
>>>>>> southeast Texas, NOT in the civilized parts.
>>>>>>        
>>>>>>            
>>>>> That depends if you call Houston and Dallas civilized doesn't it?
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>> More so than Beaumont, or Longview.  Houston has pretty much lost its
>>>> identity with so many people coming in from all parts of the world,
>>>> and Dallas still aspires to be New York City, and fails miserably.
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>> Fair to say that most every city in the U.S. has it's own uncivilized
>>> population.
>>>
>>>  
>>>      
>> reckon it's true world-wide.... not an american privilege, ya know!
>>
>> reg
>>    
>
> Naw, in Canada, we don't have any uncivilized population. Doesn't
> prevent people from imitating Americans or Germsns or even Texans tho <grin>
>
> We are civilized people who act uncivilized at times <grin>
>  

that can NOT be a true statement, Dan - there are /french/  in Canada,
so your post represents an oxymoron.
But, of course - maybe you meant to write that the canadians (in
general) are uncivilized but - on the whole - try to act civilized ??

reg
DISCLAMER
 /french/  is a generalisation and does not represent a personal attack
against any "good" french person or people you may know!
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

squaredancer
In reply to this post by »Q«
On 29.04.2009 04:29, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  »Q« to
generate the following:? :

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>  
>> Even if you thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't have a choice.
>>    
>
> WRT foreign soldiers, Canadian courts seem split on that issue.  Asylum
> was granted to an Iraqi soldier who refused to participate in the
> illegal invasion of Kuwait, but later not to an American one who
> refused to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq.
>
>  
>> In short, regardless that after the war, "I was following orders" may
>> or may not get you off, the choice is not yours, you gave up that
>> choice  when you volunteered.
>>    
>
> In the U.S. military, orders must be followed unless they're illegal,
> and the simple fact that they're superior orders means the soldier must
> infer that they're legal unless they're obviously not.  IIRC the bar
> for deciding that they're not legal is that they be "patently illegal",
> but I'm not going digging through the UCMJ for it, heh.
>
>  

yepp >>Q<< - you hit the proverbial nail there.  The political decisions
make or break whatever the current public opinion is.
Typical is the "West" German court's decisions on the old "East" German
border-guards, accused of (illegally ??) shooting escapees at the
fence.  The "West" decision was (is) that even the common soldier MUST
know that shooting a refugee is a criminal offence and the it was (is)
possible for the soldier to refuse/disobey that order!
My opinion is that, if the soldier was "under orders" to shoot - then
Dan's arguments count and there is no case to answer... If a soldier is
to (primarily) obey and follow eg the Geneva Convention, then there is
no excuse for any mis-conduct in/by the armed forces.
Now - why did Bush exonerate ALL US-troops from being taken to
International Tribunals against War Crimes??  Seems a weak case to me!

But - my point was that I do not consider a soldier's (of any statute)
claim to heroism by having simply "been there, did my bit for my
country" as valid (as opposed to physical acts of heroism)!

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

squaredancer
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On 29.04.2009 09:43, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Ron Hunter to
generate the following:? :

> »Q« wrote:
>  
>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
>> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> Even if you thought Bush was wrong going into Iraq, you didn't have a choice.
>>>      
>> WRT foreign soldiers, Canadian courts seem split on that issue.  Asylum
>> was granted to an Iraqi soldier who refused to participate in the
>> illegal invasion of Kuwait, but later not to an American one who
>> refused to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq.
>>
>>    
>>> In short, regardless that after the war, "I was following orders" may
>>> or may not get you off, the choice is not yours, you gave up that
>>> choice  when you volunteered.
>>>      
>> In the U.S. military, orders must be followed unless they're illegal,
>> and the simple fact that they're superior orders means the soldier must
>> infer that they're legal unless they're obviously not.  IIRC the bar
>> for deciding that they're not legal is that they be "patently illegal",
>> but I'm not going digging through the UCMJ for it, heh.
>>
>>    
> The best protection when given an order that is likely to result in some
> kind of prosecution is to request it in writing.  I used that provision
> only once, and got out of it without repercussions.  Had I followed it,
> thousands of military and civilian payroll checks would have gone out
> incorrect.  The officer later apologized in front of the office.
>  

don't know how it is today but, during my 11+years in the british army
it was NOT possible to question an order - neither orally nor in writing.
If it was asked for in written forn, the reply was "DO IT - NOW"
I often wonder just how many witnesses to a war crime never made it
home..... and of course, there was always the overruling "The overall
situation requires drastic measures", which was something that could
never be disproven by the common squaddie!

reg

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Moz Champion (Dan)
In reply to this post by squaredancer
squaredancer wrote:

> On 29.04.2009 01:07, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion
> (Dan) to generate the following:? :
>> squaredancer wrote:
>>  
>>> On 28.04.2009 17:15, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Jay Garcia
>>> to generate the following:? :
>>>    
>>>> On 28.04.2009 02:56, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   --- Original Message ---
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>      
>>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>>>              
>>>>>>> Irwin Greenwald wrote:
>>>>>>>                  
>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2009 11:57 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>>> On 27.04.2009 13:51, Irwin Greenwald wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    --- Original Message ---
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                          
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/26/2009 5:11 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>                              
>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately I think I got your point and I think so did
>>>>>>>>>>> Xavier. Ethnic
>>>>>>>>>>> racial overtone if I ever saw one, unless of course you'd
>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>> explain.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>                                    
>>>>>>>>>> Actually it was geographical bigotry.  And I'm sure you know
>>>>>>>>>> what Xavier
>>>>>>>>>> thinks!!!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Irwin
>>>>>>>>>>                                
>>>>>>>>> No idea what he thinks but being from the same ethnic
>>>>>>>>> background I can
>>>>>>>>> imagine. You have something against people from Texas?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                            
>>>>>>>> I do not think it is unusual for many Texans to be bigoted about
>>>>>>>> religious questions and sexual preference questions.
>>>>>>>>                        
>>>>>>> No, it isn't, but you find that mostly in the areas of east, and
>>>>>>> southeast Texas, NOT in the civilized parts.
>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>> That depends if you call Houston and Dallas civilized doesn't it?
>>>>>>                
>>>>> More so than Beaumont, or Longview.  Houston has pretty much lost
>>>>> its identity with so many people coming in from all parts of the
>>>>> world, and Dallas still aspires to be New York City, and fails
>>>>> miserably.
>>>>>            
>>>> Fair to say that most every city in the U.S. has it's own
>>>> uncivilized population.
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> reckon it's true world-wide.... not an american privilege, ya know!
>>>
>>> reg
>>>    
>>
>> Naw, in Canada, we don't have any uncivilized population. Doesn't
>> prevent people from imitating Americans or Germsns or even Texans tho
>> <grin>
>>
>> We are civilized people who act uncivilized at times <grin>
>>  
>
> that can NOT be a true statement, Dan - there are /french/  in Canada,
> so your post represents an oxymoron.
> But, of course - maybe you meant to write that the canadians (in
> general) are uncivilized but - on the whole - try to act civilized ??
>
> reg
> DISCLAMER
> /french/  is a generalisation and does not represent a personal attack
> against any "good" french person or people you may know!


Certainly there are French in Canada, French Canadians, who are distinct
from the French from France

Canadians (all of us) are civilized, who sometimes act uncivilized.
After all, most of our TV comes from the US, so we see how to act
uncivilized all the time <grin>
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Jay Garcia
On 29.04.2009 04:51, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> Canadians (all of us) are civilized, who sometimes act uncivilized.
> After all, most of our TV comes from the US, so we see how to act
> uncivilized all the time <grin>

Yup, they got some pretty good ideas how to do sex scandals from
watching OUR TV .. :-)

--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox is on its way out

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
In reply to this post by Moz Champion (Dan)
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

> Canadians (all of us) are civilized, who sometimes act uncivilized.
> After all, most of our TV comes from the US, so we see how to act
> uncivilized all the time <grin>

which most of the shows are made in Canada!

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: Free Speech applies everywhere in the FREE
world, except for some strange reason, not on the
mozilla.org newsgroup servers.  Therefore, replying to
this message may get your posting deleted or may get
you banned from the group, by the Lunacy of the Mozilla
Bullies.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
1 ... 345678910