<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16674" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=640140813-19062008><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#800000
size=2>Vizzz peeps,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=640140813-19062008><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#800000
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=640140813-19062008><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#800000
size=2>While I don't really want to get drug into this conversation, and I find
myself agreeing with our Donovan that Pearl Harbor was attacked and not
invaded (semantics, really), I must say to Donovan (and anyone else) that
I'm not sure I'd cite Wikipedia as the be-all, end-all of internet reference
material, especially since anyone and their dog can "contribute" to
it.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=640140813-19062008><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#800000
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=640140813-19062008><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#800000
size=2>your pal,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=640140813-19062008><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#800000
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=640140813-19062008><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#800000
size=2>DC</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
vision2020-bounces@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com] <B>On
Behalf Of </B>Donovan Arnold<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 19, 2008 12:12
AM<BR><B>To:</B> Chasuk<BR><B>Cc:</B> vision2020@moscow.com; Tom
Hansen<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Gitmo: And The Invasion of Pearl
Harbor?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>
<P>Chas,</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Does this sound familiar:</P>
<P> </P>
<P>"<A title="December 7"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_7">December 7th</A>, <A
title=1941 href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1941">1941</A>—<I><B>a
date which will live in infamy</B></I>—the <A title="United States"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States">United States of
America</A> was <A title="Attack on Pearl Harbor"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor">suddenly and
deliberately <EM><STRONG>attacked</STRONG></EM></A> by <A
title="Imperial Japanese Navy"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Japanese_Navy">naval</A> and
<A title="Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Japanese_Navy_Air_Service">air
forces</A> of the <A title="Empire of Japan"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Japan">Empire of
Japan</A>."</P>
<P> </P>
<P>It should, because it was said by President Roosevelt.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Notice the word attacked. Japan never invaded, it attacked. Just like
the Terrorists, terrorist from varies countries in the Middle East. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>"Attack on Pearl Harbor" is in Wikipedia, and the encyclopedia.
"Invasion of Pearl Harbor" is not. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>So, sorry to say, your statement, "Peral (Pearl) Harbor was an
invasion, clear and simple. It isn't arguable, though you will
probably try." Is not supported by the existing facts and opinions of
those in better know over you and me. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>Maybe in your universe, Pearl Harbor was invaded and taken over by
the Japanese. But in this one where FDR was President and Congress
declared war on Japan, they attacked. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>"following brutal rapes by our soldiers" Do you have any evidence of
such allegations? Or are you jumping to that conclusions?</P>
<P> </P>
<P>"We responded by invading a nation that was not involved in the
attack. Since that<BR>time, to use your shameful, morally bankrupt
language, hundreds of<BR>thousands of innocent Iraqis have died."</P>
<P> </P>
<P>I didn't say I supported invading Iraq, did I. I was against the idea
even when Tom Hansen, and half the other go along Marxists on this
list were gunning for Saddam in place of Bin Laudin. Further,
this has nothing to do with terrorists being detained and having access
to civil courts. Many of the innocent deaths which you report, are the
cause of Terrorists which we once had in custody but were let go because
of terrorist sympathizers and lawyers in this country more concerned for
their rights then the survival of the nation. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>My argument is, that the rights of the victims, soldiers,
and citizens are denied when unlawful combatants and terrorists are
released because of US lawyers and terrorist sympathizers fight for
their rights over the rights of the people they kill and victimize.
</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Best Regards,</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Donovan</P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P><BR>--- On <B>Wed, 6/18/08, Chasuk
<I><chasuk@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid">From:
<SPAN>Chasuk</SPAN> <chasuk@gmail.com><BR>Subject: Re:
[Vision2020] Gitmo<BR>To: donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com<BR>Cc: "Andreas
Schou" <ophite@gmail.com>, "Tom Hansen"
<thansen@moscow.com>, vision2020@moscow.com, "Tom Hansen"
<idahotom@hotmail.com><BR>Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2008, 10:43
PM<BR><BR><PRE>On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 21:47, Donovan Arnold
<donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com> wrote:
> No, it wasn't an invasion. It was an attack. Just like Pearl Harbor
was an
> attack. How many people that attacked Pearl Harbor or planned the attack,
> got sympathies and access to Civil Courts in the United States?
Peral Harbor was an invasion, clear and simple. It isn't arguable,
though you will probably try.
> Andreas, what happened to the rights of all the dead people and their
> families that were killed on the 9/11? How about those people forced to
jump
> from a 100 story building to their death because of actions by the
> terrorists your sympathize with? How about the rights of the people that
> were alive with their flesh burnt off as they slowly wait for their death
> after the 9/11 attack, they have no rights? What happened to their rights,
> Andreas? I don't see you squawking about the children left without a
mother
> or fathers because of these terrorists? Do they get to appeal three, six,
> eight times, the judgment rendered against them by this monsters? You
> show no outcry for them. You show more concern and empathy for the 170
> terrorists that killed our people, then for the sick injustice done
against
> their victims. Why is that exactly, Andreas?
How does all of this emotive language help your argument? A group of
terrorists attacked our nation. We weren't invaded. We responded by
invading a nation that was not involved in the attack. Since that
time, to use your shameful, morally bankrupt language, hundreds of
thousands of innocent Iraqis have died. They have died, women and
children, by having their flesh seared off, in horrific explosions,
from starvation, following brutal rapes by our soldiers, or after
months of hideous torture. What happened to their rights? While that
is an emotive, interesting question, it hasn't nothing to do with the
actual subject of this conversation. You show more concern for
winning an argument than with investigating the truth. Why is that
exactly, Donovan?</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>