From: "Robert G Lewis" 

No you didn't say that person was a leftie. Only that the left had a
fascination with Nazis. My point was that there are people on BOTH sides (
which you neglected to say)  who will latch on to anything they perceive as
problematic for the other side. From my perception the mainstream
republican party is far more guilty of this than the mainstream democrats.
Even as you took an article by a republican and then talked about the lefts
fascination. Nothing leftist in that article.


"Mark"  wrote in message
news:43d6ed17$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>I did notice that (although you mean Reagan, Regan was a secretary of
>something or other), I didn't call that guy a leftie either (rather, that
>the lefties always latch onto anything they perceive as problematic for
>Bush, whether it really is or not).
>
> I said that it was good that the Pentagon commissioned a study (whereas
> the leftie automatic position is "because the study is there and is
> critical, it is bad for Bush and the world as we know it is over") and
> that perusing his past writings that I don't agree with much, if anything,
> that he's written.
>
> I suspect that the Pentagon won't agree with him either, but will most
> likely take some of his recommendations that coincide with other reports
> and incorporate them into their plans for the future.
>
> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
> news:43d6e793$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> Er Mark you did note the author of that piece served in the Regan
>> administration. Not just the left's fascination with Nazis.
>>
>>
>> "Mark"  wrote in message
news:43d6ca70{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>I don't get the left's fascination with Nazis at all -- not a day goes by
>>>that they're not calling this person or that a Nazi (mostly Bush), it
>>>makes their arguments even sillier than they already are.
>>>
>>> "George Sherwood" 
wrote in message
>>> news:pan.2006.01.25.00.14.20.369691{at}beernabeer.com...
>>>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:42:39 +0100, Phil Payne wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is so sad, it almost moves me to tears:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts01242006.html
>>>>>
>>>>> "Go to House Report 109-333 -USA PATRIOT IMPROVEMENT AND
>>>>> REAUTHORIZATION ACT
>>>>> OF 2005 and check it out for yourself. Sec. 605 reads:
>>>>>
>>>>> "There is hereby created and established a
permanent police force, to
>>>>> be
>>>>> known as the 'United States Secret Service Uniformed
Division'."
>>>>>
>>>>> This new federal police force is "subject to the
supervision of the
>>>>> Secretary of Homeland Security."
>>>>>
>>>>> The new police are empowered to "make arrests
without warrant for any
>>>>> offense against the United States committed in their
presence, or for
>>>>> any
>>>>> felony cognizable under the laws of the United States
if they have
>>>>> reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has
>>>>> committed
>>>>> or is committing such felony."
>>>>>
>>>>> The new police are assigned a variety of
jurisdictions, including "an
>>>>> event
>>>>> designated under section 3056(e) of title 18 as a
special event of
>>>>> national
>>>>> significance" (SENS).
>>>>>
>>>>> "A special event of national significance"
is neither defined nor does
>>>>> it
>>>>> require the presence of a "protected person"
such as the president in
>>>>> order
>>>>> to trigger it. Thus, the administration, and perhaps the police
>>>>> themselves,
>>>>> can place the SENS designation on any event. Once a
SENS designation
>>>>> is
>>>>> placed on an event, the new federal police are
empowered to keep out
>>>>> and to
>>>>> arrest people at their discretion."
>>>>>
>>>>> JAWOHL!
>>>>
>>>> Something doesn't make sense because there has been a Uniformed
>>>> Division
>>>> of the Secret Service forever. They are the ones you see standing
>>>> outside
>>>> the White House or the Naval Observatory.  I don't see the big deal,
>>>> they
>>>> can arrest some one if they see that person committing a
crime.  Pretty
>>>> much like any other law enforcement officer.  What makes
them Nazi's?
>>>>
>>>> George
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5