On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:13:42 +0100, JNugent  wrote:

>Cynic wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:36 +0100, John Wright 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> Its reckoned that one way or another around *80%* of cases are smoking 
>>>>> related. As they say: "Prevention is the most cost-effective means of 
>>>>> fighting lung cancer" and the way to prevent it is to ban smoking.
>> 
>>>> Agree  although not a lover of nanny state type rulings in general and if 
>>>> people wish to commit slow suicide at home they should be able to but not in 
>>>> public.
>> 
>>> I'm with you there. I'm not a lover of nanny state rulings either, but 
>>> smoking isn't good for anyone  - especially the people who do it. We've 
>>> known that for a long time, since 1950 to be exact.
>> 
>> The same is true of drinking alcohol.  Or eating fattening food.

>Is there such a thing as "secondary eating", then?

There doesn't need to be.

>Or are you fed up of going home after a night out with your clothes and 
>hair reeking of cream cakes and cheese and onion crisps?

There are lots of things banned not because they adversly affect
others, but because they are bad for the health of the consumer.

Svenne

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7547261.stm>

I mean really, the guy's spent five years one month in jail and they 
hand out a sentence of five years six months; does that not say "OK we 
fucked up big time, and we need to sentence the guy to a little longer 
than we've imprisoned him for, that way we can get the paperwork out the 
way before we let him go, otherwise we're liable to get our "asses" sued 
and end up looking like a complete and utter bunch of twats"?

-- 
bof at bof dot me dot uk

bof wrote:
> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7547261.stm>
>
> I mean really, the guy's spent five years one month in jail and they
> hand out a sentence of five years six months; does that not say "OK we
> fucked up big time, and we need to sentence the guy to a little longer
> than we've imprisoned him for, that way we can get the paperwork out
> the way before we let him go, otherwise we're liable to get our
> "asses" sued and end up looking like a complete and utter bunch of
> twats"?

IMO they don't even have the right to try anyone. Imprisoned without 
trial for five years (lucky bastard compared with some) is that what 
cicilised countries do?. Five years for his jailers would be more 
sensible for total illegality and total immorality. The USA is showing 
itself in this affair to be a far greater 'rogue state' than any other 
they accuse of being so. I spit on the USA.

In article <489b69d6$0$864$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>, 
j.murphy@libertysurf.fr says...
>
> I spit on the USA.
> 

Anyone can do that. It's not exactly a challenge. To impress anyone what 
you need to do is spit on Ascension Island or even Liechtenstein.

-- 
eric
Live fast, die only if strictly necessary.

"John of Aix"  wrote in message 
news:489b69d6$0$864$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr...
> bof wrote:
>> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7547261.stm>
>>
>> I mean really, the guy's spent five years one month in jail and they
>> hand out a sentence of five years six months; does that not say "OK we
>> fucked up big time, and we need to sentence the guy to a little longer
>> than we've imprisoned him for, that way we can get the paperwork out
>> the way before we let him go, otherwise we're liable to get our
>> "asses" sued and end up looking like a complete and utter bunch of
>> twats"?
>
> IMO they don't even have the right to try anyone. Imprisoned without trial 
> for five years (lucky bastard compared with some) is that what cicilised 
> countries do?. Five years for his jailers would be more sensible for total 
> illegality and total immorality. The USA is showing itself in this affair 
> to be a far greater 'rogue state' than any other they accuse of being so. 
> I spit on the USA.
>
You have to appreciate the History of 1941 and the way the US
treated Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbour is repeating itself.

The US, especially Republicans see themselves as at War.

Any resemblance of sanity, and proper international law and order
by the US, won't recur again until the conflict is seen as over.

Steve Terry