Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Platforms
PCXboxPlayStationNintendo
Games
ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games

Game Forum / Role Playing Games / Final Fantasy / January 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

17 Terrorist Suspects Arrested in Spain

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Freedom Fries - 10 Jan 2006 09:59 GMT
Look at that Spain arrested teror suspects without stomping on their
citizens' civil rights. They're even using due process. Imagine that,
another redumblican lie exposed.

Spain arrests 17 Islamist suspects: radio
1 hour, 57 minutes ago

MADRID (Reuters) - Spanish police arrested 17 people on Tuesday suspected of
helping recruit Islamist militants to carry out attacks in Iraq, Spanish
state radio reported.

The early-morning arrests were carried out in Madrid and Barcelona and in
the Basque country in northern Spain, it said.
A spokesman for the Civil Guard confirmed that an operation was going on,
but would not give details.

The radio said those arrested included the imam of a mosque and a suspect
who may be linked to an attack on Italian police in Iraq.

A suicide bombing attack on an Italian military police base in southern Iraq
in 2003 killed 18 Italians and nine Iraqis.

Last month, Spain arrested 16 people accused of recruiting Islamist
militants and a further two surrendered.

A judge jailed six of them on suspicion of recruiting people to send as
suicide bombers or insurgents to Iraq, Chechnya or Kashmir. The other 12
were conditionally released pending further investigation.

That investigation focused on a mosque in the southern Spanish city of
Malaga that Spanish officials said was frequented by people with radical
Islamist beliefs.
Gary Collard - 10 Jan 2006 18:19 GMT
Funny you failed to post the Algerians targeting the US who were arrested
using domestic wiretaps in Italy.  Front page everywhere else in the world,
ignored in the US media, imagine that.

> Look at that Spain arrested teror suspects without stomping on their
> citizens' civil rights. They're even using due process. Imagine that,
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> Malaga that Spanish officials said was frequented by people with radical
> Islamist beliefs.

Signature

Gary Collard
SABR-L Moderator
gmcollard@yahoo.com
http://sarcastipundit.blogspot.com/

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature
is in session."  -- Thomas Jefferson

Edward M. Kennedy - 10 Jan 2006 18:41 GMT
>> MADRID (Reuters) - Spanish police arrested 17 people on Tuesday suspected of
>> helping recruit Islamist militants to carry out attacks in Iraq, Spanish
>> state radio reported.
[snipitty-doo-da]
>> A judge jailed six of them on suspicion of recruiting people to send as
>> suicide bombers or insurgents to Iraq, Chechnya or Kashmir. The other 12
>> were conditionally released pending further investigation.

Funny, in my universe that is 18 "suspected terrorists",
only six of whom had reason enough to detain them.  (Not
taking sides, just checking my nonsense before I post it
to the usenet.)

--Tedward
Al Mundy - 14 Jan 2006 18:23 GMT
> >> MADRID (Reuters) - Spanish police arrested 17 people on Tuesday suspected of
> >> helping recruit Islamist militants to carry out attacks in Iraq, Spanish
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> taking sides, just checking my nonsense before I post it
> to the usenet.)

And in the real world, if they had been picked up by the US, those 12
wouldn't be brought in front of a judge, so they would still be behind bars,
lack of evidence or not.
James Schrumpf - 14 Jan 2006 18:31 GMT
Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.

>> >> MADRID (Reuters) - Spanish police arrested 17 people on Tuesday
> suspected of
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> wouldn't be brought in front of a judge, so they would still be behind
> bars, lack of evidence or not.

Well, to be fair, the report didn't say "lack of evidence to hold them."

It said "released pending further investigation."

Good luck finding them again if the investigation turns up anything.

Signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Schrumpf                                 http://www.hilltopper.net

We Must Protect this Couch!

Al Mundy - 15 Jan 2006 04:26 GMT
> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>
> Good luck finding them again if the investigation turns up anything.

I think if they had any evidence,  we can assume they would have held them.
So effectively, pending further investigation means the same thing.

And to quote the old saw, better 100 guilty go free than one innocent
suffer.  I think Bush has re-written that to "better 100 innocent rot in a
secret prison than one person question my power".
James Schrumpf - 15 Jan 2006 07:32 GMT
Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.

>> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> them. So effectively, pending further investigation means the same
> thing.

Why would you assume that?  Standards of evidence vary from nation to
nation.

If they didn't have enough evidence to hold them in the first place, why
is there a reason to continue the investigation?

> And to quote the old saw, better 100 guilty go free than one innocent
> suffer.  I think Bush has re-written that to "better 100 innocent rot
> in a secret prison than one person question my power".

Times have changed a bit, when that one person just might be the next one
to fly an airplane into a building full of people, or detonate a dirty
bomb in the middle of a downtown.

France's anti-terrorism laws are even more Draconian than ours, as they
can hold a person up to three years without any charges at all.  At least
in the US there has to be some reason.

And you know, you can just stop with the "question my power" nonsense
about the President.  It's obvious to one and all that questions get
asked all the time, and investigations occur.  There's not one person
being held anywhere that can't be pointed to as having some connection
with terrorism or known terrorists.  Random Ohioans aren't being rounded
up from the streets to be held for years because they liked "Farenheit
911" or sent money to the Democratic Party.

Take the '60s Berkely "fight tha power" attitude and put it away with
other relicts of the past.

Signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Schrumpf                                 http://www.hilltopper.net

We Must Protect this Couch!

Al Mundy - 15 Jan 2006 18:27 GMT
> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
> can hold a person up to three years without any charges at all.  At least
> in the US there has to be some reason.

???  I bet Masri is glad to hear that, after the CIA kidnapped him and held
him for 5 months because his name is the same as a terrorist. By the way,
they held him for two months AFTER they realized the mistake, while they
debated whether to cover up his detention.  That's such a damned good reason
to hold someone, don't you think?

And the Bush admin has made it clear in the court battles that they believe
they can hold ANYONE that they decide to, without any evidence or even
having to explain to anyone why they feel the person should be held.

> And you know, you can just stop with the "question my power" nonsense
> about the President.  It's obvious to one and all that questions get
> asked all the time, and investigations occur.  There's not one person
> being held anywhere that can't be pointed to as having some connection
> with terrorism or known terrorists.

If they goofed on Masri there's no reason to assume they didn't goof on
someone else.

> Random Ohioans aren't being rounded
> up from the streets to be held for years because they liked "Farenheit
> 911" or sent money to the Democratic Party.

Tell it to the lawyer who got held for 2 weeks because the CIA misread his
fingerprint, and he had once defended a terrorist suspect.

> Take the '60s Berkely "fight tha power" attitude and put it away with
> other relicts of the past.

Hmmm. Holding people indefinitely without having to show cause,
eavesdropping on Americans, keeping files on protest groups..

sounds an awful lot like Bush brought back the 60's.  Actually, he brought
back the 60's from Communist Russia.
James Schrumpf - 15 Jan 2006 19:28 GMT
Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.

>> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 88 lines]
> sounds an awful lot like Bush brought back the 60's.  Actually, he
> brought back the 60's from Communist Russia.

"Goofs", while hardly defensible as such, is hardly the same as
widespread abuse of power.

Are you really saying that the misreading of a fingerprint is the same as
rounding up people off the streets?

No one is being held "without cause."  Some are being held without
specific charges, but that's not the same thing.  As I said, in France
one can be held for up to three years without the same; I'd say the US
does pretty well for the most part.

However, the screw-ups need to be addressed, and they are.  That's the
part that separates US policy from some kind of dictatorship that some on
the left like to proclaim exists.

Signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Schrumpf                                 http://www.hilltopper.net

We Must Protect this Couch!

Al Mundy - 15 Jan 2006 20:03 GMT
> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>
[quoted text clipped - 105 lines]
> part that separates US policy from some kind of dictatorship that some on
> the left like to proclaim exists.

"The screw ups are being addressed?"

That would explain Bush's official signing statement upon signing the
anti-torture bill.

''The executive branch shall construe [the law] in a manner consistent with
the constitutional authority of the President . . . as Commander in Chief,"
Bush wrote, adding that this approach ''will assist in achieving the shared
objective of the Congress and the President . . . of protecting the American
people from further terrorist attacks."

In other words, you can make any law you want, but I get to interpret it any
way I want.  Because I AM THE PRESIDENT!

So, since screw-ups are being addressed, when do the impeachment hearings
start?  When do we decide that we need a regime change in the US? (hint:
it's WAY past due)

When do the CIA agents who held Masri TWO MONTHS after he was cleared
because they were looking at ways to cover up the booboo get arrested for
violating his rights?  When do they lose their jobs?

That's ok, though, Brownie lost his job.
James Schrumpf - 15 Jan 2006 20:47 GMT
Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.

>> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 134 lines]
>
> That's ok, though, Brownie lost his job.

Yet all this is being addressed, in public, without people disappearing
off the streets.

And how does one interpret "construe [the law] in a manner consistent
with the constitutional authority of the President" to mean "I get to
interpret it any way I want"?  "Constitutional authority" means he's
pointing out there are differences between the two branches as far as
responsibility and authority goes.

That battle goes back to the origins of the constition itself.

Signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Schrumpf                                 http://www.hilltopper.net

We Must Protect this Couch!

Al Mundy - 16 Jan 2006 05:56 GMT
> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>
[quoted text clipped - 139 lines]
> Yet all this is being addressed, in public, without people disappearing
> off the streets.

?? Tell it to Masri's wife and children, whose father disappeared without a
trace for 5 months.

> And how does one interpret "construe [the law] in a manner consistent
> with the constitutional authority of the President" to mean "I get to
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> That battle goes back to the origins of the constition itself.

It's been made clear to him many times that his powers are not unlimited,
and the authorizations he was given are not a full granting of the war
powers. Yet he continues to maintain that they were in fact granted to him,
and that the war powers act allows him to break the law.

If that's not insane, you tell me what it is.
aborgman@redshark.goodshow.net - 16 Jan 2006 14:49 GMT
In rec.sport.football.college James Schrumpf <jaspammenotschrumpf@adelphia.nospamnet> wrote:

> Yet all this is being addressed, in public, without people disappearing
> off the streets.

It is? What about those people who have basically disappeared off the
streets? How is it being addressed by the CIA holding a known innocent two
extra months while attempting to find a good way to cover it up?

Signature

Aaron

Terraholm - 16 Jan 2006 00:20 GMT
> Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.

> No one is being held "without cause."  Some are being held without
> specific charges, but that's not the same thing.

And you know they have good cause how? This is the same bunch that puts 3 year old kids and US
senators on terrorist suspect no fly lists...

Signature

Laurel T
"This country has nothing to fear from the crooked man who fails.
We put him in jail. It is the crooked man who succeeds
who is a threat to this country." Theodore Roosevelt

alicamdun@yahoo.com - 16 Jan 2006 02:01 GMT
> > Quiet, "Al Mundy" <unknownr@yahoo.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.

> > No one is being held "without cause."  Some are being held without
> > specific charges, but that's not the same thing.

> And you know they have good cause how? This is the same
> bunch that puts 3 year old kids and US senators on terrorist
> suspect no fly lists...

Mistakes are bad.  They should not happen.  But they do.

This is the same bunch over to whom so many want to
give power over our medical care, child care and to
regulate internet speech.

At least they are working in an area where they are
actually supposed to be.

-Tom Enright

"If you think that health care is expenseive now, wait
until it's free."
-P.J. O'Rourke

> --
> Laurel T
> "This country has nothing to fear from the crooked man who fails.
>  We put him in jail. It is the crooked man who succeeds
>  who is a threat to this country." Theodore Roosevelt
Dewey - 10 Jan 2006 20:23 GMT
> Funny you failed to post the Algerians targeting the US who were
> arrested using domestic wiretaps in Italy.  Front page everywhere else
> in the world, ignored in the US media, imagine that.

Are you saying that we should consider laws from European countries when
trying to interpret our own?
Dewey - 11 Jan 2006 18:41 GMT
>> Funny you failed to post the Algerians targeting the US who were
>> arrested using domestic wiretaps in Italy.  Front page everywhere else
>> in the world, ignored in the US media, imagine that.
>>
> Are you saying that we should consider laws from European countries when
> trying to interpret our own?

No response (yet) but I'll point out that Sam Alito emphantically told the
Senate judiciary committee today that foreign laws should *NOT* be used in
interpreting our own.

"I don't think it's appropriate or useful to look to foreign law in
interpreting the provisions of our Constitution," Judge Alito said in
response to questions from Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, in
the third day of the judge's confirmation hearings before the Senate
Judiciary Committee.

Do you agree or disagree with him?
Tim Martin - 12 Jan 2006 03:24 GMT
>>> Funny you failed to post the Algerians targeting the US who were
>>> arrested using domestic wiretaps in Italy.  Front page everywhere else
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Do you agree or disagree with him?

Interesting, since many of the provisions of our own constitution were
derived from Magna Carta and English Common Law, the writings of John Locke,
and countless other sources. No single idea in the Constitution or the Fed
Papers is entirely original. Some of them date back thousands of years to
distant and primitive lands.

What is original about our Constitution is the combination of those ideas
into some coherant whole. People rarely get an opportunity to do create
something like that becase, ultimately, in the fullness of time, the law
begins to collapse under its own gerrymandered weight (something that was
understood well even 200 years ago.)

TM
the Bede - 12 Jan 2006 02:00 GMT
> >>> Funny you failed to post the Algerians targeting the US who were
> >>> arrested using domestic wiretaps in Italy.  Front page everywhere else
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> begins to collapse under its own gerrymandered weight (something that was
> understood well even 200 years ago.)

yeah, judges with blinders on, that's what we need.  go sammy!!!
Terraholm - 13 Jan 2006 07:57 GMT
> Interesting, since many of the provisions of our own constitution were
> derived from Magna Carta and English Common Law, the writings of John
> Locke, and countless other sources. No single idea in the
> Constitution or the Fed Papers is entirely original. Some of them
> date back thousands of years to distant and primitive lands.

Do not forget the example from the  Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy...

Signature

Laurel T
"The lives of cadis, scholars, shaykhs, Alids,
and Nestorian priests, and persons who do not
combat against us are safe from us."
Hulagu Khan's arrow message at the sack of Baghdad

alicamdun@yahoo.com - 13 Jan 2006 13:01 GMT
> > Interesting, since many of the provisions of our own constitution were
> > derived from Magna Carta and English Common Law, the writings of John
> > Locke, and countless other sources. No single idea in the
> > Constitution or the Fed Papers is entirely original. Some of them
> > date back thousands of years to distant and primitive lands.

> Do not forget the example from the Six Nations of the Iroquois
> Confederacy...

Why would you want to remember it?  Are they still teaching this
chestnut in schools?

-Tom Enright

> --
> Laurel T
> "The lives of cadis, scholars, shaykhs, Alids,
> and Nestorian priests, and persons who do not
>  combat against us are safe from us."
> Hulagu Khan's arrow message at the sack of Baghdad
Dewey - 13 Jan 2006 14:44 GMT
>> > Interesting, since many of the provisions of our own constitution were
>> > derived from Magna Carta and English Common Law, the writings of John
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Why would you want to remember it?

Yeah. It's not like they were white people, right Tom.
alicamdun@yahoo.com - 13 Jan 2006 15:10 GMT
> >> Do not forget the example from the Six Nations of the
> >> Iroquois Confederacy...

> > Why would you want to remember it?

> Yeah. It's not like they were white people, right Tom.

What is that supposed to mean?

I'm just pointing-out that the myth that the Constitution was
in anyway influenced by the Iroquois Confederacy  is still
accepted by many as fact.  It has even found its way into
school text books.

-Tom Enright
Terraholm - 13 Jan 2006 16:57 GMT
>>>> Do not forget the example from the Six Nations of the
>>>> Iroquois Confederacy...
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> accepted by many as fact.  It has even found its way into
> school text books.

It is still debated but hardly more 'myth' for previous democracies for influence.

Franklin was a known as an admirer of the Iroquois and had access to their law as commissioner of
treaties. And his "Albany Plan of Union" immerging from the Albany meeting with the Iroquois shows
both English and Iroquois precedents... much of it is directly related to the later Articles of
Confederation.
It is known that others founders had a knowledge of Indian confederation systems and the foundations
of Indian democracy.   They were also avid readers of the French philosophes which had many
descriptions of North American Indians as the 'noble savage'.... So saying it is a myth that it had
influence may be a bit of a stretch...

=====

Even Congress believes it. =)

To acknowledge the contribution of the Iroquois Confederacy of Nation
the development of the United States Constitution and to reaffirm
the continuing government-to-government relationship between tribes
and the United States established in the Constitution.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNlTED STATES
September 16, 1987

Mr Inouye (for himself, Mr, Evans, Mr DeConcini, Mr. Burdick,
Mr McCain, Mr. Adams, Mr Boren, Mr Conrad, Mr Cranston, Mr
D'Amato, Mr Dole, Mr Ford, Mr Fowler, Mr Levin, Mr Pell, Mr
Pryor, Mr Reid, Mr Riegle, and Mr Stafford) submitted the following
conurrent resolution; which was referred to the Select Committee on
Indian Affairs.

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

To acknowledge the contribution of the Iroquois Confederacy of
Nations to the development of the United States Constition
and to reafirm the continuing government-to-gavernment
relationship between Indian tribes and the United States
established in the Constitution.

Whereas the original famers of the Constitution, including most
notably, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, are
known to have, greatly admired the concepts, principles and
government practices of the Six Nationa of the Iroquois
Confederacy and,

Whereas the contutition of the original Thirteen Colonies into
one republic was explicitly modeled upon the Iroquois
Confederacy as were many of the democratic principles which
were incorporated into the Constitution itself; and,

Whereas since the formation of the United states, the Congress
has recognized the sovereign status of Indian tribes, and
has, through the exercise of powers reserved to the Federal
Government in the Commerce Clause of the Connstitution
(art. I s8, oI.9), dealt with Indian Tribes on a government
to-government basis and has, through the treaty clause (art.
62, Cl.a) entered into three hundred and Seventy treaties
with Indian tribal nations; and,

Whereas from the first treaty entered into with an Indian
nation, the treaty with the Delaware Indian of September
17, 1778, and thereafter in every Indain treaty until the
cessation of treatymaking in 1871, the Congress has assumed
a trust resonsiblity and obligation to Indian tribes
and their members to "exercise the utmost good faith in
dealings with the Indians" as provided for in tha Northwest
Ordinance of 1787, (l Stat: 50); and,

Whereas Congress has consistently reaffimed these fundamental
polices over the past two hundred years througth legislation
specifically designed to honor this special relatiodship; and,

Whereas, the judicial system of the United States has consistently
recognized and reaffirmed this special relationship:

Now. therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate (the House of
Representatives Concurring), That

(1) the Congress, on the occasion of the two hundredreth anniversary of
the signing of the United States Constitution, acknowledges the
historical debt which this Republic of the United States of America
owes to the Iroquois Confedaracy and other Indian Nations for their
demonstration of enlightened, democratic principals of Government
and their example of a free association independent Indian Nations;

(2) the Congrees also hereby reaffirms the constitutionship recognized
government-to-government relationship with Indian tribes which has
historically been the cornerstone of this Nation's Indian policy;

(3) the Congress specifically acknowledges and reaffirms the responsiblity
and obligation of the United States Governments to Indian tribes,
including Alaskan Natives, for thier preservation, protection and
enhancement, including the provision of health, education, social
and economic assistance programs as necessary to assist tribes to
perform their governmental reponsibility to provide for the social and
economic wellbeing of their members and to preserve tribal cultural
identity and heritage; and

(4) the Congress also acknowledges the need to exercise the utmost good
faith in upholding its treaties with the various tribes, as the tribes
understood them to be, and the duty of a great Nation to uphold its
legal and moral obligation for the benefit of all its citizens so that
they and their posterity may also continue to enjoy the rights they
have enshrined in the United States Consitution for time immemorial.

============

Signature

Laurel T
"Heaven grew weary of the excessive pride
and luxury of China....I am from the Barbaric North.
I wear the same clothing and eat the same food as
the cowherds and horse-herders.
We make the same sacrifices and we share our riches.
I look upon the nation as a new-born child and I care
for my soldiers as though they were my brothers."
Chingis Khan

Dewey - 13 Jan 2006 18:06 GMT
>> >> Do not forget the example from the Six Nations of the
>> >> Iroquois Confederacy...
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> accepted by many as fact.  It has even found its way into
> school text books.

The Law Library of Congress lists it as an "influence". Several dozen
scholarly articles have been written highlighting aspects of the
constitution drawn the Iroquois Confederacy. I find none that present
compelling arguements, other than author opinion, to dispute. Maybe you
could help out and cite some research papers that make such a case?
alicamdun@yahoo.com - 13 Jan 2006 18:35 GMT
> > What is that supposed to mean?
> >
> > I'm just pointing-out that the myth that the Constitution was
> > in anyway influenced by the Iroquois Confederacy  is still
> > accepted by many as fact.  It has even found its way into
> > school text books.

> The Law Library of Congress lists it as an "influence". Several dozen
> scholarly articles have been written highlighting aspects of the
> constitution drawn the Iroquois Confederacy. I find none that present
> compelling arguements, other than author opinion, to dispute. Maybe you
> could help out and cite some research papers that make such a case?

First, no American Indian tribe has ever developed a written
language, numbering system etc. so no written document was
ever created by the Iroquois.

(*) Lefkowitz, Mary. "Out of Many, More Than One." Wall Street Journal,

March 24, 1997, p. A-16.
This is a review of The Menace of Multiculturalism (by Alvin J.
Schmidt) and We Are All Multiculturalists Now, by Nathan Glazer. The
review begins: "Does the U.S. Constitution owe more to the 18th-century
Iroquois than it does to the ancient Greeks? No, but many younger
people may answer yes, because it is what they have learned in school.
The history that children learn is not necessarily a record of what
actually happened in the past; rather, it is often an account of what
parents and teachers believe they ought to know." Later in the review,
Lefkowitz, a professor of classics at Wellesley College, writes that
"however impressive the governmental organization of the Iroquois
nation, the inspiration behind the Constitution may once again be
credited to the European Enlightenment, and the ancient Greeks..."

===============================================

-Tom Enright
Dewey - 13 Jan 2006 18:58 GMT
>> > What is that supposed to mean?
>> >
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> language, numbering system etc. so no written document was
> ever created by the Iroquois.

Even if this were true, it would be irrelevant. However, the Cherokee most
definitely had a written language. I don't know if this is simply more of
your extraordinary ignorance or a deliberate lie on your part, but either
way, it certainly highlights your lack of credibility on the entire
subject.

A quick google search reveals several other Native American groups that had
written languages: the Nahuatl, the Ojibwe, the Anasazi (I feel foolish
having forgetten this considering I have explored many Anasazi ruins full
of petroglyphs). No doubt there are numerous other examples, chestnuts to
you, not deserving of recognition or acceptance.

> (*) Lefkowitz, Mary. "Out of Many, More Than One." Wall Street Journal,
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> review begins: "Does the U.S. Constitution owe more to the 18th-century
> Iroquois than it does to the ancient Greeks? No, but many younger

The operative word being "more". But hey, why bother with honesty now?
alicamdun@yahoo.com - 13 Jan 2006 20:33 GMT
> >> > What is that supposed to mean?
> >> >
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> > language, numbering system etc. so no written document was
> > ever created by the Iroquois.

> Even if this were true, it would be irrelevant. However, the
> Cherokee most  definitely had a written language. I don't know
> if this is simply more of  your extraordinary ignorance or a
> deliberate lie on your part, but either way, it certainly
> highlights your lack of credibility on the entire  subject.

The Cherokee never developed a written language.  In 1821,
Sequoyah, part native, part white, learned about the written word
from non-natives.  It wasn't created by the natives.

> A quick google search reveals several other Native American
> groups that had written languages: the Nahuatl, the Ojibwe,
> the Anasazi (I feel foolish  having forgetten this considering I
> have explored many Anasazi ruins full  of petroglyphs). No
> doubt there are numerous other examples, chestnuts to
> you, not deserving of recognition or acceptance.

Can you provide a site for an example of this writing?  Considering
the topic under discussion is the US Constitution, I'd be interested
those natives living in North America.

I do admit that I was specifically defining "American Indian" as a
native
of North America, and a I have never heard of or seen any form of
written language or numbering system.

> > (*) Lefkowitz, Mary. "Out of Many, More Than One." Wall Street Journal,
> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> > review begins: "Does the U.S. Constitution owe more to the 18th-century
> > Iroquois than it does to the ancient Greeks? No, but many younger

> The operative word being "more". But hey, why bother with honesty now?

The operative word in your original post is "influence."  As in:

'"The Law Library of Congress lists it as an "influence" '

How do you  disprove "influence"?  The US Consitution may have also
been "influenced" by the phases of the moon.

-Tom Enright
Dewey - 13 Jan 2006 21:07 GMT
>> >> > What is that supposed to mean?
>> >> >
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> The Cherokee never developed a written language.  In 1821,
> Sequoyah, part native, part white, learned about the written word

Raised by Cherokee

> from non-natives.  It wasn't created by the natives.

He was a native and he created a syllabary. Thus, your claim that "
American Indian tribe has ever developed a written language" was false.

>> A quick google search reveals several other Native American
>> groups that had written languages: the Nahuatl, the Ojibwe,
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> of North America, and a I have never heard of or seen any form of
> written language or numbering system.

You can go to Canyon de Chelly in Arizona or Bandelier in New Mexico and
see the petroglyphs yourself. Or, if that is beyond your financial means,
click this link:
http://www.pro-visions.com/pictogrphs.htm

I strongly recommend visiting these sites in person. You would probably
find Nixon Rock at Canyon de Chelly most interesting. While there, take a
jeep tour up the river. But don't be surprised if they get stuck in the
"quicksand" and the way back. Don't go in late June or July because the
cottonwoods bloom and you practically need a gas mask not to choke on it.

>> > (*) Lefkowitz, Mary. "Out of Many, More Than One." Wall Street
>> > Journal,
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> '"The Law Library of Congress lists it as an "influence" '

Wasn't that the original claim that you so blithely dismissed? Laurel's
exact statement was "Do not forget the example from the  Six Nations of the
Iroquois Confederacy".

> How do you  disprove "influence"?  The US Consitution may have also
> been "influenced" by the phases of the moon.

As I said, there are dozens, if not hundreds of scholarly articles tracing
the "influence" and "example" of the Iroquois Confederacy on the US
Constitution. I cannot find a single scholarly paper that even mentions the
phases of the moon as an "influence." But maybe you are better verse in
this than I am.
Terraholm - 13 Jan 2006 23:03 GMT
> Can you provide a site for an example of this writing?  Considering
> the topic under discussion is the US Constitution, I'd be interested
> those natives living in North America.

That the Iroquois " great law" was not written does not mean it did not exist and work.

Here is a paper on the debate about the influence on our constitution and gives both sides:
http://www.campton.sau48.k12.nh.us/iroqconf.htm

I will add that the concept of people right to "happiness" existed in no other document with a Euro
origin

> I do admit that I was specifically defining "American Indian" as a
> native
> of North America, and a I have never heard of or seen any form of
> written language or numbering system.

mayans... and they were masters of mathematics

Mi'kmaq (has several spellings) an  Algonquian  language was written in  pictographs predating euro
contact, later modified by Jesuit missionaries and now writtien with our alphabet. Covered some US
areas and Lower Eastern Canada
alicamdun@yahoo.com - 13 Jan 2006 20:37 GMT
> A quick google search reveals several other Native American groups that had
> written languages: the Nahuatl, the Ojibwe, the Anasazi (I feel foolish
> having forgetten this considering I have explored many Anasazi ruins full
> of petroglyphs). No doubt there are numerous other examples, chestnuts to
> you, not deserving of recognition or acceptance.

Is this the Ojibwe "written language" to which you refer:

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/cree.htm

James Evans, a Wesleyan missionary working at Norway House in
Hudson's Bay, invented a syllabary for the Ojibwe language in about
1840. He had tried to produce a Latin-based orthography for Ojibwe,
but eventually gave up and came up with a syllabary, based partly
on shorthand.

-Tom Enright

<snip>
Rob Browning - 10 Jan 2006 20:24 GMT
>Funny you failed to post the Algerians targeting the US who were arrested
>using domestic wiretaps in Italy.  Front page everywhere else in the world,
>ignored in the US media, imagine that.

I'm guessing Italy trampled over the rights of its citizens to do that
too?

Rob
ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net

Signature

Owner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly
because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from.

Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as
a good day on AGFF without JT bashing!

Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc

"'Do I have Bucky in a can?' That's in pretty poor taste, mister."
--Captain America to Deadpool, Deadpool #69

steve - 12 Jan 2006 02:01 GMT
> Funny you failed to post the Algerians targeting the US who were arrested
> using domestic wiretaps in Italy.  Front page everywhere else in the world,
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
> "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature
> is in session."  -- Thomas Jefferson

How profound and apt Jefferson's words are today, with Congress under
neocon control. Well, at least the life and liberty parts.
trijcomm - 10 Jan 2006 20:28 GMT
>Spanish
>state radio reported.

Hmm ... hardly an unbiased source, doncha think?
trijcomm - 11 Jan 2006 20:47 GMT
Spanish state radio also stated that the terrorist suspects were
arrested without any infringement upon their civil rights. State radio
also said it would be stupid to think that Spain would do anything like
that.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.