Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	"CJ Sitter" <otto_von_sitter@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 00:20:29 -0000

So, in other words, you mean no one should even bother replying to
his silly statements, right?

BTW, I do know what it's like to be ostrocised for my opinion, but I
don't use my opinions to purposefully upset people.

Marcus Cornelius Tiberius

--- In novaroma@--------, radams36@j... wrote:
> --- In novaroma@--------, "CJ Sitter" <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
> > My take on this is just that this guylikes to make us mad every
> > once in a while when things slow down a bit. I still remember
> > back when he said the press was showing Pakistanians
> > cheering at US retaking Kuait instead of at the destruction of
the
> > WTC. I agree with our Consul and the several others that are
> > calling for this man's dismissal. Someone that enjoys wreaking
> > havok does not deserve the privilige to be called a citizen of
New
> > Rome.
> >
> > Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
> >
>
> Salve, Tiberius, and salvete omnes!
>
> I agree with you ALMOST 100%. I do think Michel is a gadfly who
> enjoys sowing discontent and provoking people through insult. I
> don't, however, wish to see him dismissed. I like to think of Nova
> Roma as being superior to even Ancient Rome in terms of both
freedom
> of speech and tolerance of unpopular viewpoints. I don't think
Michel
> brings credit to the micronation, but I think dismissing him would
> bring some discredit onto Nova Roma for intolerance. Instead, I
would
> call on all citizens who find his posts provocative and
inflammatory
> (as I do) to ignore them entirely. As our good censor Sulla
> commented, don't feed the troll. If he enjoys provoking people,
let's
> deny him that pleasure by refusing to be provoked.
>
> I realize quite well that this is easier said than done (and that
> does apply to me, too), but I think it's the best approach. Social
> censure can come from sources other than legislation, and sometimes
> should - I think this is one of those situations that calls for
> voluntary action by the citizenry.
>
> Comments welcomed!
>
> Valete,
>
> Rufus Iulius Palaeologus





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 16:32:19 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
Whether you agree with war or not it is a part of
life and human society. We war just like animals.
Yes animals do war but since they do not have the
mental capacity that humans have in the sense that the
brain learns as ours do animals do not use guns,
bombs, etc to fight their wars. So since humans are
opinionated creatures those opinions are going to have
to accept that war and violence is a part of any
society, homo-sapien or not, on this planet.
Innocent people unfortunately die when we war.
They always have and always will and as long as any
government exists on this earth we will always have
war. Governments and politicians control whether war
occurs or not.
All I see is every person denouncing the Taliban
for how cruel, evil, and inhumane they are. Now I'm
not supporting them so don't jump to that conclusion
please. Surely they are not as bad as we make them
out to be? The United States has supported Middle
Eastern, African, and South American dictatorships so
long as it benefits its national interests. What
about the Aborigines that have been mistreated in
Australia and South America? What about the peoples
whom Imperial Rome squashed to expand its empire?
Sounds just like what adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime
did (minus the extermination camps). What about
Englands brutalization of the Irish and other
sovereign nations it has invaded and took over for the
purpose of expanding its empire. The United states is
not without guilt besides what I listed above. We
oppressed women almost just as bad as the Taliban.
What of the Native Americans? People need to
understand that because you think you have it good and
these people have it bad...maybe they think they have
it good and we have it bad? It comes down to cultural
relativism. Besides if the Taliban is so bad and Al
Qaeda has been threatening the USA all this time why
haven't we persecuted them and hunted them down like
we did the Nazi's? Israel violated Arghentina's
sovereignty in the 1960-'s when it kidnapped and
extracted Adolf Eichmann from his home. Why did we
not speak up then? But everyone does when Bin laden
is associated with committing a horrific and brutal
terrorist attack that was just as bad as those orders
that Eichmann had his subordinated carry out. I see
alot of hypocrisy in this whole situation.
In conclusion all I'm saying is before anyone
speaks out about anything they should step back and
analyze the whole situation from as unbiased a
perspective as possible and then draw your
conclusions. Everyone seems to be acting off of
emotions. Like "Michel loos" and then everyone jumps
on him for his comments. now I do not know prior
history with that issue so i will not comment on it.
Whether we agree with others perspectives or not be it
bigoted and provocative or intellectual and well
thought out we need to accept it and if we disagree
respond by saying I disagree with you here and this is
my take on the matter. Unless we can do that then
there is absolutely no point in holding any forum for
the exchange of ideas.
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Civilians in Democracy
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 17:00:23 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
"To that I must disagree. War and terrorism and
very different things. War in itself poses Military
Forces against Military Forces in order to defeat
that enemy, forcing it to surrender or to be
conquered. Total-warefare includes Civilian Targets
in order to diminish the capability of that
Military Force from being replenished with new
soldiers, weapons, and supplies. Terrorism on the
other hand just randomly kills people in order to
frighten a general populace with no goals except for
the acts of Terrorism themselves."

To this I must disagree. War and terrorism are
different things yes. However, terrorism is not
random. It has a specific goal behind it. Usually
political or monetary. Dictionary definitions of
terms like this paint a vague picture but do not
provide an accurate one. Yes it is designed to spread
fear or as you said "frighten a general populace." Yes
the act of terrorism is one of the goals but that is
not the focus. Do you think Osama Bin Laden committed
this act in order to just "frighten" America?
Absolutely not. He had a specific goal behind it. I
reccommend that people who wish to learn more about
him watch the Frontline special on Bin Laden. I even
believe it is posted on the internet somewhere. But
back to my point on terrorism here is a more accurate
definition coming from "Barron's Law Dictionary" for
the term hijacking: "the commandeering or seizure of a
mode of transportation such as an airplane, truck, or
train by force or threat of force for illegal
purposes. Such puposes may include theft of the cargo
or other contents; redirection of the destination to
suit the hijacker's specific purposes; or kidnapping
or hostage taking for monetary or political demans."
Now tied in with that from the same source is the term
interrorem which is defined as: "Latin for 'in fear'.
A condition subsequent placed in a will or contract
that has the purpose of intimidating the beneficiary
and thereby perhaps securing his compliance. Such
clauses be unenforceable if the condition they attempt
to impose is impossible, illegal or against public
policy..."
Now I belive those two definitions clearly define
terrorism and the events that transpired on September
11, 2001 and other terrorist activities. Now our
military response is not an act of terrorism because
there exists two latin phrases that comprise the rules
of war. Those two terms are "Jus Ad bellum" and I
belive the other is "Jus Ad bello". Basically for
those who do not know of the rules of war they mean a
military response is justifiable if 1.)you are
provoked (basically an act of war is committed against
the nation and its sovereignty) and 2.) the military
response is in proportion to the losses (basically for
something minor you don't just go and drop a nuclear
weapon and annihilate an entire nation).
So that is all I have to say in response to the
statement quoted above. I believe I have clearly
outlined terrorism and our justification for military
usage.
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Consular Veto
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 21:09:06 -0400

Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.

The edictum entitled "Edictum Propraetoricium XXX about the Approved Regula
of LEGIO VII "Res Publica" of Provincia Thule in NOVA ROMA", issued October
14 by Caeso Fabius Quintilianus in his capacity as Propraetor Thules is
hereby vetoed and thus rendered ineffective.

I undertake this action for several reasons.

First, the precident has already been well-established within Nova Roma that
the prerogative of sponsoring reenactment legions lies with the Senate. To
have provincial governors granting such status (or even greater official
status; see below) would invite confusion and usurp those precidents which
have been hitherto followed.

Second, Caeso Fabius Quintilianus' edictum does more than merely "sponsor" a
legion in the sense that Senate sponsorship does. It sets up an official
entity of the Nova Roman Republic (and, not incidentally, the corporate
entity of Nova Roma). When the Senate sponsors a reenactment legion, it is
establishing a relationship of goodwill and mutual cooperation between two
independent entities; namely, Nova Roma and the legion in question. The
proposed Legio VII "Res Publica" would exist as an official formation within
Nova Roma, and would thus subject us to macronational legal liabilities we
are currently unprepared to shoulder. Put bluntly, if a hurled javelin
pierces someone's thigh, Nova Roma could be sued. That is not the case with
our sponsored legions, because they are in fact independent entities with
whom we merely have a friendly relationship.

I should point out that I am all in favor of Nova Roma eventually having its
own reenactment legion in the future, as a fully integrated entity of the
Republic. However, I am also fully convinced that such a thing should only
be done under the auspices of the Sodalitas Militarium and the Senate, with
full consideration given to the legal and financial implications involved.

I would encourage Caeso Fabius Quintilianus to form Legio VII as an
independent entity using the same guidelines as were posted in the edictum.
It seems to be, overall, a sound plan for a reenactment legion. Once it is
established (even on paper), official sponsorship of the Legion can be
sought through already-established channels set up by the Senate and the
Sodalitas Militarium. I want to emphasize the fact that I don't object to a
Thule legion in principal; I merely have a problem with the means used to
bring it about and the implications they have for our Res Publica.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

Subject:	[novaroma] Review of the Ohio Event
From:	Centurion M Bianchius Antonius <imperialreign@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 18:27:06 -0700 (PDT)

I would like to run down the 1st Annual (I hope) Lacus
Magni Roman Festival.

Fun was had buy all. First we had pretty good weather,
it did not rain like it was supposed to. We meet at
Grigg's Dam at shelterhouse number 4! (pretty exciting
so far)

There Drusila and her lovely assistants cooked up a
great feast of stew and pasta and a wonderful Persian
drink I have forgotten the name off. (Sorry)

We donned Roman garb and ate, took pictures at a small
ampitheater and played some tossing games.

About 2pm we traveled to my humble dwelling and
watched Titus while munching on cheese, crackers,
fresh fruit. We washed it down with a fine Sangiovese
from Italia. (Or Coke)

That evening, we went to The Olive Garden for some
hearty Italian food. We talked, ate, drank and, I
believe, had a good time. Afterwards, I gave a little
tour of our fair city to Germanicus and then parted.

As a token, I had some original artwork made for this
special event. Everyone attending received a limited
edition "art scroll" depicting a Roman battle.


Africanus and myself hope to hold another one sometime
in 2002.


Thanks

Marcus Bianchius Antonius




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Civilians in Democracy
From:	exitil@--------
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 22:41:38 EDT

In a message dated 10/16/01 2:26:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
uriel@-------- writes:

> Ah... so, what country do you live in, again?
>
> Decia Cornelia

I live in the United State.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Civilians in Democracy
From:	exitil@--------
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 22:44:02 EDT

In a message dated 10/16/01 2:54:43 PM Central Daylight Time,
ksterne@-------- writes:

> Salve Decia,
>
> "Extil" is too much of a coward to even give a recognizable name, so
> I doubt you will get his or her country. I hope this person is not a
> citizen, since he or she appears to approve of the taking of innocent
> lives.

My real name is Alexander Temal; my NR name is Alexius Novius Exitilianus;
and you're too quick to judge someone me a coward - the opposite is true.

> Extil, let's give you the "they voted for the government so they are
> legitiment targets" argument. Many foreigners, children and others
> were killed in these attacks. People who don't vote. I assume you
> still approve?

I don't have a list of the countries all these people belong to, and
therefore I cannot be sure any of them were either innocent or guilty.

> Gaius Popillius Laenas
>

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Osama's Guilt
From:	exitil@--------
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 22:50:01 EDT

In a message dated 10/16/01 5:40:22 PM Central Daylight Time,
qccaesar@-------- writes:

> Ave,
> Osama Bin Laden is guilty as sin for terrorist
> assaults on the United states and has been linked to
> multiple attacks on us as well as in france and the
> assassination of the former egyptian president. As I
> said before we don't need proof to try him just put
> the guy on tv and he does the provision of evidence
> himself. The man is going to die whether processed
> through the CJ system or taken out my special
> operations. As president Bush previously stated there
> are no negotiations we just want him handed over it is
> that simple.
> Quintus Cornelius caesar
>

That would be an injustice. You can't demand a nation hand over a man who
hasn't been found guilty of any crime. Find him guilty, then do it.
Anything else is unjust.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Osama's Guilt
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 20:08:47 -0700

Ave,

Its called extradition. You can extradite a person to a country to stand trial. I would assume that is what the United States has in mind.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: exitil@--------
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Osama's Guilt


In a message dated 10/16/01 5:40:22 PM Central Daylight Time,
qccaesar@-------- writes:

> Ave,
> Osama Bin Laden is guilty as sin for terrorist
> assaults on the United states and has been linked to
> multiple attacks on us as well as in france and the
> assassination of the former egyptian president. As I
> said before we don't need proof to try him just put
> the guy on tv and he does the provision of evidence
> himself. The man is going to die whether processed
> through the CJ system or taken out my special
> operations. As president Bush previously stated there
> are no negotiations we just want him handed over it is
> that simple.
> Quintus Cornelius caesar
>

That would be an injustice. You can't demand a nation hand over a man who
hasn't been found guilty of any crime. Find him guilty, then do it.
Anything else is unjust.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Osama's Guilt
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 20:16:50 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
"That would be an injustice. You can't demand a
nation hand over a man who hasn't been found guilty of
any crime. Find him guilty, then do it. Anything
else is unjust."

Okay lets get something straight here...and
forgive me if I'm coming across a bit strong...but
there is no injustice here nor would there be. We
have probable cause that Bin Laden ordered these
terrorist attacks that I mention those on our
embassies, the WTC, Pentagon, egyptian president, and
in france. Therefore there is reasonable doubt and
articulable facts that he is associated with these
killings of innocent people who are in no way linked
to any criminal activity while performing their jobs.
Therefore there is no crime involved in President Bush
and the United states demanding the extradition of Bin
Laden to the United states from Afghanistan or
whatever sandpit he's hiding in. I know how our
criminal justice system works, and its limitations and
in no way would his death in the attacks on
afghanistan via missle assault or special ops be a
crime. He is linked with evidence as well as his own
statements on tv and should be extradited to the
United states not to a third party neutral country.
He committed an act of war on the United states and
therefore our military response legally falls under
the 2 rules of war "jus ad bellum" and "jus ad bello".
We were provoked by the act of war and therefore are
within the limitations of the act of war to militarily
assault Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and any nation that has
the audacity to harbor him. Or if its an injustice
then maybe Hitler's innocent of the holocaust. He
never pulled the trigger he just gave the okay to put
the Final Solution into motion therefore maybe he's
innocent. Bin Laden gave the order for the assault
maybe he's innocent too? He is guilty therefore no
injustice would be occurring.
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Civilians in Democracy
From:	"C. Minucius Hadrianus" <shinjikun@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 00:07:12 -0400

Salvete,

Ok, let me get this straight..... you say you live in the United States, and
are "very much for the removal of the United State. <sic>"? Would you mind
clarifying that statement a bit for me? While I realize everyone is entitled
to thier opinion, if you are "very much for the removal of the United
State", why exactly do you choose to live here? Or do you mean the removal
of the United States from Afghanistan and/or the middle east in general?

Valete,

C. Minucius Hadrianus

<snipped>
I live in the United State.
<snipped>

<snipped>
My real name is Alexander Temal; my NR name is Alexius Novius Exitilianus;
and you're too quick to judge someone me a coward - the opposite is true.
<snipped>

<snipped>
But I would like to also say that I am very much for the removal of the
Taliban; yet just the same, I'm very much for the removal of the United
State.
<snipped>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"Teleri ferch Nyfain" <rckovak@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 00:01:46 -0400

Salvete
I am responding to some remarks by Quintus Cornelius Caesar

<<We oppressed women almost just as bad as the Taliban. >>
1 - who is we? The United States, even 150 years ago (before Susan B. Anthony and the Saratoga Assembly) never to my knowledge forced women to wear clothing covering their whole body, with only a little crocheted hole to see out of. The US never forced women to live in houses with the windows painted over. These 2 strictures alone are causing women to suffer from sunlight deprivation. The US (nor any other country that I know of, in the last 50 years) has condemned women to death for teaching other women to read and write, although before the Civil War, blacks in this country suffered this fate. Neither has any other country denied women medical care based only on their sex. The treatment of women (remember, the MAJORITY of the population) by the Taliban is unprecendented, certainly in modern times. No matter that Saudi women might be repressed or the females in the Sudan subject to mutilation, neither of these countries has declared war on their women as have the Taliban. In fact if the Taliban were to continue the way they have, I doubt many women will survive there over the next 25 years.

<<It comes down to cultural
relativism.>>>
2 - the treatment of Afghan women by the Taliban is NOT cultural, at least not the culture these women grew up with. Afghanistan was a relatively progressive country for Muslim women until the Taliban took over. Then over night these women, many with advanced degrees and careers - lawyers, doctors, university professors, business managers, chemists, engineers - found themselves treated little better than animals, reduced (if widowed or without male relatives) to begging in the streets to feed themselves and worse, their children. They are forced to watch their daughters growing up without an education or chance to live any kind of decent life. The suicide rate among these women has tripled over the last two years. This is NOT their culture.

I have hated the Taliban ever since I heard about these atrocities committed against the women in Afghanistan, which I first learned in 1996. I now know that on top of all the above, the Taliban have committed mass executions against the Shiite male population in Afghanistan, and other groups. The only reason these people aren't "worse" than Hitler? They haven't got the power of Hitler. But they want it. And if they manage, using Bin Laden & these terrorist tactics, to gain control of the Middle East, they will have that power, and the ability to slaughter countless millions. The only light at the end of that scenario would be that after a generation or two the population would dwindle away, since the majority of women would not survive.

Valete,
Helena Galeria


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] novaroma] Chicken Soup for the Roman Soul
From:	"Valerie Hartzer" <valsylph@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 23:45:55 -0400

As posted by Pompeia Corneilia Strabo:
Salvete Omnes:

I crossposting this link to Cornelia List last night, and in light of
the discussions today in the forum, I find it appropriate to crosspost
here.

It is a link of Cicero's account of the Dream of Publicus Cornelius
Scipio. It deals with virtue, the value and virtue of defending one's
country, and the afterlife.

I found it to be enlightening and inspirational.

Http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/cicero-republic6.html

Bene vale,
Pompeia

Thank you so much Pompeia!! We could all use a little spiritual Chicken Soup!
I am taking this off to my getaway in the woods this week.

Bene vale,
Lucia Valeria Secunda Ianuaria (a new citizen!! YEAH!!)
"Try to enjoy the great festival of life with other men"
Epictetus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 21:49:49 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
Well obviously based on your name (female) you
have a bias from the get-go. You obviously did not
read what I said previously about stepping back and
analyzing the situation before commenting. The United
States did not violate womens right to the extent of
the Taliban but the point was we violated the rights
of the woman it's that simple.
You also obviously do not understand the
terminology of cultural relativism. It implies that
all cultures are in proportion and don't translate
that as oh women are mistreated here but aren't here.
That means though one culture may violate this groups
and another doesn't that other culture violates
someone's right in another portion of society. If
women's right s are solely violated in Afghanistan
then what about the institutional discrimination held
against women and minorities in the united states? We
are just as bad as other countries just in different
portions of society. If the suicide rate of women
tripled there what about the suicide rates of youth,
those in poverty, those under extreme stress here...do
they not count?
How can you compare them to Hitler? That would
be an insult to the nazi's. Now I'm no nazi but they
could never reach the height of power that hitler
reached. They do not have the complex system
established by the nazi's and never will. Hitler
makes those fools look like weekend warriors. If you
wanna see terrorism look at what the Schutzstaffeln,
GESTAPO, KRIPO, SD did in nazi germany. That is
terror and they knew how to terrorize and put fear in
people to control them. The Taliban is nothing.
Quintus Cornelius caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] Silk Road Link
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Tue, 16 Oct 2001 22:29:22 -0700

Ave,

I have found a really interesting link....it deals with the timeline of the Silk Road. I thought it might interest some of our citizens so here is the URL: http://www.silk-road.com/artl/chrono.shtml

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Subject:	[novaroma] Ancient Greek Dictionary????
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Craig=20Stevenson?= <gaiussentius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 16:19:44 +1000 (EST)

Salvete omnes,

I am writing to ask if anyone out there knows where I
can kind an Ancient Greek Dictionary, or, even better,
a website that can translate from Ancient Greek into
English and from English into Ancient Greek? If so,
could you please let me know, as I am at my wits end
as to trying to find something to help me, and have
had no luck so far. Any help would be greatly
appreciated.

Valete bene omnes,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

http://briefcase.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Briefcase
- Manage your files online.



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	=?iso-8859-1?Q?Re=3A=20=5Bnovaroma=5D=20Formosanus=27=20post=20=20=28was=3A=20Re=3A=20Dissapointme?=
From:	tiberius.ann@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 10:41:30 +0200

Salve Consul,

I don't think that being able to having items reworked by other people than
the author himself would be a good idea. This would create censored posts
and would not allow the people to tell their true oppinion.

However, I am very much for a group of people who can write an introduction
to a post, so that after reading what it is all about and what kind of thinking
is behind the post, one can decide if one wants to read it or leave it.

Valete, Tiberius Annaeus Otho

>I agree to your suggestiosn about being able to rework the item being
>submitted. I also think that in cases like this an introduction to the
>post might be necessary and would fulfill the need to make sure the
>reader understands the context of the post.



________________________________________
E-Mail for everyone! http://www.bluemail.ch/ powered by Bluewin!






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"solinvictus" <caiustarquitius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:29:06 +0200

KRIPO? For which Criminal Actions were THEY responsible, that are superior
to what the average German did in the 3rd. Reich?

Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.
Caius Tarquitius Saturninus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Michael Loughlin [mailto:qccaesar@--------]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 06:50
An: novaroma@--------
Betreff: Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it


Ave,
Well obviously based on your name (female) you
have a bias from the get-go. You obviously did not
read what I said previously about stepping back and
analyzing the situation before commenting. The United
States did not violate womens right to the extent of
the Taliban but the point was we violated the rights
of the woman it's that simple.
You also obviously do not understand the
terminology of cultural relativism. It implies that
all cultures are in proportion and don't translate
that as oh women are mistreated here but aren't here.
That means though one culture may violate this groups
and another doesn't that other culture violates
someone's right in another portion of society. If
women's right s are solely violated in Afghanistan
then what about the institutional discrimination held
against women and minorities in the united states? We
are just as bad as other countries just in different
portions of society. If the suicide rate of women
tripled there what about the suicide rates of youth,
those in poverty, those under extreme stress here...do
they not count?
How can you compare them to Hitler? That would
be an insult to the nazi's. Now I'm no nazi but they
could never reach the height of power that hitler
reached. They do not have the complex system
established by the nazi's and never will. Hitler
makes those fools look like weekend warriors. If you
wanna see terrorism look at what the Schutzstaffeln,
GESTAPO, KRIPO, SD did in nazi germany. That is
terror and they knew how to terrorize and put fear in
people to control them. The Taliban is nothing.
Quintus Cornelius caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"solinvictus" <caiustarquitius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:29:21 +0200

I think it is not necessary to discuss these topics in this Forum and spam
other people`s computers with loads of mails. This is, IMO not a NOVA ROMA
Topic. What about discussing these things in a political Forum? There are
enough of them in the Internet.

Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.

Caius Taquitius Saturninus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Teleri ferch Nyfain [mailto:rckovak@--------]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 06:02
An: novaroma@--------
Betreff: Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it


Salvete
I am responding to some remarks by Quintus Cornelius Caesar

<<We oppressed women almost just as bad as the Taliban. >>
1 - who is we? The United States, even 150 years ago (before Susan B.
Anthony and the Saratoga Assembly) never to my knowledge forced women to
wear clothing covering their whole body, with only a little crocheted hole
to see out of. The US never forced women to live in houses with the windows
painted over. These 2 strictures alone are causing women to suffer from
sunlight deprivation. The US (nor any other country that I know of, in the
last 50 years) has condemned women to death for teaching other women to read
and write, although before the Civil War, blacks in this country suffered
this fate. Neither has any other country denied women medical care based
only on their sex. The treatment of women (remember, the MAJORITY of the
population) by the Taliban is unprecendented, certainly in modern times. No
matter that Saudi women might be repressed or the females in the Sudan
subject to mutilation, neither of these countries has declared war on their
women as have the Taliban. In fact if the Taliban were to continue the way
they have, I doubt many women will survive there over the next 25 years.

<<It comes down to cultural
relativism.>>>
2 - the treatment of Afghan women by the Taliban is NOT cultural, at least
not the culture these women grew up with. Afghanistan was a relatively
progressive country for Muslim women until the Taliban took over. Then over
night these women, many with advanced degrees and careers - lawyers,
doctors, university professors, business managers, chemists, engineers -
found themselves treated little better than animals, reduced (if widowed or
without male relatives) to begging in the streets to feed themselves and
worse, their children. They are forced to watch their daughters growing up
without an education or chance to live any kind of decent life. The suicide
rate among these women has tripled over the last two years. This is NOT
their culture.

I have hated the Taliban ever since I heard about these atrocities committed
against the women in Afghanistan, which I first learned in 1996. I now know
that on top of all the above, the Taliban have committed mass executions
against the Shiite male population in Afghanistan, and other groups. The
only reason these people aren't "worse" than Hitler? They haven't got the
power of Hitler. But they want it. And if they manage, using Bin Laden &
these terrorist tactics, to gain control of the Middle East, they will have
that power, and the ability to slaughter countless millions. The only light
at the end of that scenario would be that after a generation or two the
population would dwindle away, since the majority of women would not
survive.

Valete,
Helena Galeria


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Osama's Guilt
From:	Tal123berg@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 06:53:31 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@e...>
wrote:
> Ave,
>
> Its called extradition. You can extradite a person to a country to
stand trial. I would assume that is what the United States has in
mind.
>
> Vale,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Legally speaking, your assumption is probably wrong.

Extradition usually requires a bilateral treaty and the presentation
of evidence, both of which are absent in this case. Even if the US
requested e.g. Germany to extradite Bin Laden, the courts, which are
responsible for the assessment of the validity of extradition
requests, would probably say no, as he would face the death penalty
in the US (that is unless the US promises not to execute him).

The more realistic approach would be to see this not as a request
to "extradite" Bin Laden based on (very well regulated) international
extradition law but to hand him over based on the international law
of war and terrorism (which is newly emerging based on what is
happening right now see e.g. NATO Article 5 invokement).

The question remains however, what to to with him once he is in
allied hands. The best way probably would be to set up an
international criminal court to try him (like the one created in
Rome, rejected only by seven countries worldwide, among them China,
Iraq, Lybia and the US), although he could arguably enter a plea of
insanity anywhere in the world.

I guess, therefore, that the most probable outcome will be, that he
is killed in action (making him, of course, an even better martyr and
icon for the oppressed -at least that's the way they describe
themselves- Muslim youth)

Marcus Marcius Rex





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	AW: [novaroma] Re: Desapointment with my fellowcitizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	"solinvictus" <caiustarquitius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:39:51 +0200

Salve.
"War is only the continuation of politics by other means."
"Der Krieg ist lediglich die Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln"
This sentence is from von Clausewitz. Actually, it is necessary to have a
slight Idea of german language to understand it. It means, that in every
time of history warfare was heavyly influenced by the momentary social
structures and habits. That is, because in the 19th century "Politik" had a
completely different meaning than it has today.

Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.

Caius Tarquitius Saturninus






-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Michel Loos [mailto:loos@--------]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. Oktober 2001 22:42
An: novaroma@--------
Betreff: Re: [novaroma] Re: Desapointment with my
fellowcitizens/condoleance to the afghans


On Mon, 2001-10-15 at 17:18, Shane Evans wrote:
> I have tolerated the rants and ravings of this bafoon
> enough now. This was the perverbial straw that broke
> my camel's back. I currently hold two military
> commissions, one as a Tribune in service to Nova Roma,
> and another most importantly, as a Captain in the
> United States Army. Although I am asigned as part of
> the Homeland Security, my own sister is currently in
> Pakistan with a field hospital. I am assuming you
> have spent no time in the military, nor have you
> really taken any time to actually study any military
> history, or tactical theory.

I am a conscencious objector. And gained that status in a country
with conscription. I had to serve double time (1 extra year) doing
civil service for a monthly wage of $100 (one hundred) at time
when I was allready PhD in chemistry. I paid high money and time for my
ideas and certainly will continue to stand up for those ideas :
I am opposed in _all_ cases to the usage of arms be it by the state or
privately. I am also opposed in _all_ cases to taking lives be it from
innocents or guiltys.

I happen to be also graduate in history (speciality Roman History) and
have a special interrest in military history wich I combine with great
pleasure with my hobby of wargaming (Prefered wargames: ASL and IRII).

In fact it is that interest in military history that conducted me to
consenscious objection, no religious or philosophical reason but
rational ones.

> So I will take a moment
> to give you a quick lesson. In warfare, any form of
> warfare, there is to be expected, regretably, a
> certain ammount of civilian casualties.

Which turns any warfare, made by any country into "state terrorism" :
innocent lifes taken in order to achieve a political goal, since "War is
only the continuation of politics by other means".

> This is one
> of the evils of warfare. Most civilized nations, such
> as the US and Brittain, have developed tactics and
> weaponry that greatly reduce the chances of this form
> of collateral damage. If you have been monitoring the
> news, the US did accidentally hit a civilian target,
> and immediatly issued an appology.

The apologies I saw where for hitting an ONU target, not civilian
afghans, but I could have missed that one.

> Unlike the Taliban
> government who has regularly done this to their own
> people without so much as a legitimate reason why.

The fact that the Taleban is evil (which I totally agree he is
to all the reasons already named here I would add the criminal
destruction of a large number of greco-bactrian art, and of course the 2
giant buddhas)

Manius Villius Limitanus

> I
> support both our Honorable Consul, and my Provincial
> Propraetor of Lacus Magni. Furthermore, I think with
> the history of this individual to post things that are
> clearly only meant to cause harm and heartache, that
> the Senate, Censors, or whoever has this power, should
> levy a measure of sensure against this individual, if
> not even banishment!
>
> M. Scipio Africanus
> Legate of Lacus Magni Orientalis
> Tribunus Angusticlavii of the Militarium
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>







Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Osama's Guilt
From:	"Javier Augusto Gil-Ruiz Gil-Esparza" <javier_gil_ruiz@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 09:44:47 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, exitil@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 10/16/01 5:40:22 PM Central Daylight Time,
> qccaesar@-------- writes:
>
> > Ave,
> > Osama Bin Laden is guilty as sin for terrorist
> > assaults on the United states and has been linked to
> > multiple attacks on us as well as in france and the
> > assassination of the former egyptian president. As I
> > said before we don't need proof to try him just put
> > the guy on tv and he does the provision of evidence
> > himself. The man is going to die whether processed
> > through the CJ system or taken out my special
> > operations. As president Bush previously stated there
> > are no negotiations we just want him handed over it is
> > that simple.
> > Quintus Cornelius caesar
> >
>
> That would be an injustice. You can't demand a nation hand over a
>man who
> hasn't been found guilty of any crime. Find him guilty, then do
>it.
> Anything else is unjust.

Salvete cives omnes.

If I understand you correctly you demand Ben Laden to be found guilty
before he is handed over as the only way of avoiding an injustice.
That means that to be found guilty in absentia is the only "just"
possibility. You will forgive me I find this stance funny.

Alas, this is a micronation concerned with reviving ancient roman
values. The better aspects of roman legislation are undoubtedly part
of these. It seems that your views are quite opposed to them.

I would sugest you to reconsider the motives you could possibly have
had for joining a community whose goals so blatantly seem to
contradict yours, specially the inmoderate trolling of the main list.

As to the handing over of Ben Laden I do not see why anyone could
possibly object to it. In spite of not being a U.S. citizen I believe
I know enough about this "undeniably imperfect but nevertheless
admirable" country to be sure that he would get a fair trial if he
were judged there.

Yes, he would get the best possible defendants, paid for by the U.S.
government (not that he isn't able to afford these, or so I've
heard). Anybody would be able to see for him or herself if the trial
was fair or not, as I'd bet it would be shown on T.V. (worldwide).

Criminals are extradited to be judged every day, and I do not find it
unfair. Indeed it is often the only way of avoiding impunity and
further crimes.

It is occasionaly the case that some country refuses to extradite a
person or group arguing that he would not receive a fair trial
abroad, or that the alleged crimes aren't such.

This position may be justified in some cases, such as "crimes of
opinion". I do not think this applies to the leader of Al Quaida.

As I see this situation, the U.S. has taken every possible and
realistic diplomatic and otherwise peaceful steps to avoid more mass
murders of its citizens.

Having failed in these attempts, and due to the inmense risk posed by
the continued existence of such a ruthless and powerful terrorist
organisation, the U.S. has chosen to pursue them by declaring war on
the self-alleged government that harbors them. Their efforts to avoid
innocent victims are undeniable, and more so when compared with the
terrorists' actions.

At worst the only semiharsh judgement I could deem appropiate would
be that the U.S. government chooses the possibility of causing (as
few as possible) innocent foreign victims to avoid (potentially very
numerous) innocent U.S. victims. I'd say this is any country's
prerrogative.

Thus I'd maintain in this case that "condemning both equally" or
otherwise comparing both sides is not "neutrality" but insidious
propaganda.

Mentioning crimes against humanity commited centuries or decades ago
in an attempt to justify the Taliban or making them look "less evil"
is futile, as the only thing you can do about them now is to learn
from them and teach the next generations to condemn them too.

Vivat devotio hispanica.

Marcus Salix Saverius

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Ancient Greek Dictionary????
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	17 Oct 2001 08:25:08 -0200

On Wed, 2001-10-17 at 04:19, Craig Stevenson wrote:
> Salvete omnes,
>
> I am writing to ask if anyone out there knows where I
> can kind an Ancient Greek Dictionary, or, even better,
> a website that can translate from Ancient Greek into
> English and from English into Ancient Greek? If so,
> could you please let me know, as I am at my wits end
> as to trying to find something to help me, and have
> had no luck so far. Any help would be greatly
> appreciated.

www.perseus.org

has great dictionaries both greek and latin.

Manius Villius Limitanus

Subject:	Re: AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 06:39:36 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
And decline NR citizens the right to voice their
opinions? Not very open are we?
quintus cornelius caesar
--- solinvictus <caiustarquitius@--------> wrote:
> I think it is not necessary to discuss these topics
> in this Forum and spam
> other people`s computers with loads of mails. This
> is, IMO not a NOVA ROMA
> Topic. What about discussing these things in a
> political Forum? There are
> enough of them in the Internet.
>
> Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.
>
> Caius Taquitius Saturninus
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Teleri ferch Nyfain
> [mailto:rckovak@--------]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 06:02
> An: novaroma@--------
> Betreff: Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
>
>
> Salvete
> I am responding to some remarks by Quintus Cornelius
> Caesar
>
> <<We oppressed women almost just as bad as the
> Taliban. >>
> 1 - who is we? The United States, even 150 years
> ago (before Susan B.
> Anthony and the Saratoga Assembly) never to my
> knowledge forced women to
> wear clothing covering their whole body, with only a
> little crocheted hole
> to see out of. The US never forced women to live in
> houses with the windows
> painted over. These 2 strictures alone are causing
> women to suffer from
> sunlight deprivation. The US (nor any other country
> that I know of, in the
> last 50 years) has condemned women to death for
> teaching other women to read
> and write, although before the Civil War, blacks in
> this country suffered
> this fate. Neither has any other country denied
> women medical care based
> only on their sex. The treatment of women
> (remember, the MAJORITY of the
> population) by the Taliban is unprecendented,
> certainly in modern times. No
> matter that Saudi women might be repressed or the
> females in the Sudan
> subject to mutilation, neither of these countries
> has declared war on their
> women as have the Taliban. In fact if the Taliban
> were to continue the way
> they have, I doubt many women will survive there
> over the next 25 years.
>
> <<It comes down to cultural
> relativism.>>>
> 2 - the treatment of Afghan women by the Taliban is
> NOT cultural, at least
> not the culture these women grew up with.
> Afghanistan was a relatively
> progressive country for Muslim women until the
> Taliban took over. Then over
> night these women, many with advanced degrees and
> careers - lawyers,
> doctors, university professors, business managers,
> chemists, engineers -
> found themselves treated little better than animals,
> reduced (if widowed or
> without male relatives) to begging in the streets to
> feed themselves and
> worse, their children. They are forced to watch
> their daughters growing up
> without an education or chance to live any kind of
> decent life. The suicide
> rate among these women has tripled over the last two
> years. This is NOT
> their culture.
>
> I have hated the Taliban ever since I heard about
> these atrocities committed
> against the women in Afghanistan, which I first
> learned in 1996. I now know
> that on top of all the above, the Taliban have
> committed mass executions
> against the Shiite male population in Afghanistan,
> and other groups. The
> only reason these people aren't "worse" than Hitler?
> They haven't got the
> power of Hitler. But they want it. And if they
> manage, using Bin Laden &
> these terrorist tactics, to gain control of the
> Middle East, they will have
> that power, and the ability to slaughter countless
> millions. The only light
> at the end of that scenario would be that after a
> generation or two the
> population would dwindle away, since the majority of
> women would not
> survive.
>
> Valete,
> Helena Galeria
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Osama's Guilt
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 06:41:31 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
Extradition usually does require a treaty of sorts
to occur but not always...point and case the
kidnapping and extraction of Adolf Eichmann from
Argentina to Israel. That was extradition legal or
not.
Quintus cornelius caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Osama's Speech
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 13:58:48 -0000

Salvete Omnes:

Excuse my possible naivity here, but.......

Bin Laden made a speech approximately two weeks ago, around the onset
of the American/British air retaliations.

Alas, I did not keep it, but I'm sure its 'archived' somewhere, in
which he stated that the U.S. could expect "more", and that a holy war
would be launched against the U.S. It was far from a love letter.



.........this is pretty close to an admission of guilt, if not
specifically about the events of Sept. 11, an admission of being or
becoming an active enemy of the U.S. and allies, and western freedoms
in general.

And, if you put this together with the dribs and drabs of evidence
linking the Sept. 11 culprits to Bin Laden and El Quaidi, its adds up
to enough "dope" on the guy to atleast request his extradiction for
questioning if nothing else?

Bene vale,
Po




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 07:26:34 -0700 (PDT)

--- Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@--------> wrote:
> Ave,
> Well obviously based on your name (female) you
> have a bias from the get-go. You obviously did not
> read what I said previously about stepping back and
> analyzing the situation before commenting. The
> United
> States did not violate womens right to the extent of
> the Taliban but the point was we violated the rights
> of the woman it's that simple.
> You also obviously do not understand the
> terminology of cultural relativism. It implies that
> all cultures are in proportion and don't translate
> that as oh women are mistreated here but aren't
> here.
> That means though one culture may violate this
> groups
> and another doesn't that other culture violates
> someone's right in another portion of society. If
> women's right s are solely violated in Afghanistan
> then what about the institutional discrimination
> held
> against women and minorities in the united states?
> We
> are just as bad as other countries just in different
> portions of society. If the suicide rate of women
> tripled there what about the suicide rates of youth,
> those in poverty, those under extreme stress
> here...do
> they not count?
> How can you compare them to Hitler? That would
> be an insult to the nazi's. Now I'm no nazi but
> they
> could never reach the height of power that hitler
> reached. They do not have the complex system
> established by the nazi's and never will. Hitler
> makes those fools look like weekend warriors. If
> you
> wanna see terrorism look at what the Schutzstaffeln,
> GESTAPO, KRIPO, SD did in nazi germany. That is
> terror and they knew how to terrorize and put fear
> in
> people to control them. The Taliban is nothing.
> Quintus Cornelius caesar
>
In 1923 Hitler was a nut in a Beer Hall that people
laughed at.

10 later he was master of Germany
7 more years and he was master of most of Europe.

Al Qaeda is farther along than Hitler was in 1923.

Drusus
Al Qaeda Delenda Est.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Nova Roman War List
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 07:41:30 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete Omnes,

I Have just started a new list, NR War, for citizens
who wish to discuss the War on Terrorism with other
Nova Romans.

It is at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nrwar

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Propraetor America Austrorientalis


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Nova Roman War List
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:20:46 +0200

Salvete Omnes,

I Have just started a new list, NR War, for citizens
who wish to discuss the War on Terrorism with other
Nova Romans.

It is at

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nrwar>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nrwar

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Propraetor America Austrorientalis

Salve Illustrus Lucius Sicinius Drusus!

I must thank You!

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://thule.novaroma.org/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Civilians in Democracy
From:	exitil@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 00:59:11 EDT

In a message dated 10/16/01 10:52:39 PM Central Daylight Time,
shinjikun@-------- writes:

> Salvete,
>
> Ok, let me get this straight..... you say you live in the United States,
and
> are "very much for the removal of the United State. <sic>"? Would you mind
> clarifying that statement a bit for me? While I realize everyone is
entitled
> to thier opinion, if you are "very much for the removal of the United
> State", why exactly do you choose to live here? Or do you mean the removal
> of the United States from Afghanistan and/or the middle east in general?

I live here, and that means I want all parasites near where I live to either
become otherwise, or be exterminated/relocated. As for why I choose to live
here, it is because it is the best place I can find... but that in no way
means I must allow it to remain as it is.

>
> Valete,
>
> C. Minucius Hadrianus



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	radams36@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:00:41 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "CJ Sitter" <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
> So, in other words, you mean no one should even bother replying to
> his silly statements, right?

Exactly. The modus operandi is pretty well established by now - make
a provocative and overtly insulting and offensive statement, wait for
a few heated responses, then restate the case in much more moderate
terms to look less like a bad guy. Blame the original post on the
language barrier - mention that English is not your first language.
It's the same thing every time.

>
> BTW, I do know what it's like to be ostracised for my opinion, but
I
> don't use my opinions to purposefully upset people.
>
> Marcus Cornelius Tiberius

You shouldn't be ostracised for holding a different opinion, but
Michel goes out of his way to be insulting and offensive, far beyond
just holding a differing or unpopular viewpoint. If we stop
responding, I think we take away his toy.

Salve,

Rufus Iulius Palaeologus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Extradition of Osama
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 13:28:59 EDT

Salvete
As someone who has been involved in scenario design overseeing of several
versions of the extraction of bin Laden from his host country, I have to say
the US would prefer that he was handed over to US to stand trial. That way
some form of legitimacy would remain.
A snatch scenario is fraught with problems, and would only be used as a last
resort. Ultimately the US hopes a 2k bomb has bin Laden's name on it.

Removing bin Laden does not solve terrorism, anymore then removing the head
of the Cartel solved the drug problem. However, by his removal, he makes the
Base a little more vulnerable. Also it helps dry up operating money,
critical money for expenses the terrorists need to continue in today's
society. Because things have tightened up considerably. It will cost more
money, and a larger network to continue to operate as before, and the less
money they have, the harder to operate and the greater likelihood of
detection and capture.

Could he receive a fair trial if captured? Doubtful, if here in the US. An
international tribunal under the auspices of the UN would be best. But hard
to organize. The Arabs themselves could try him, especially Saudi Arabia,
who have arrest warrants for him if he
ever returned. But he has powerful friends among the Arabs and could be
acquitted. This is why everybody hopes that he is killed in the fighting,
his body identified, and we go on to the next step.

Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 07:48:42 -0700 (PDT)

what has taken Al Qaeda 20 years took hitler 10 they
are still behind hitler
quintus cornelius caesar
--- "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
>
> --- Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@--------> wrote:
> > Ave,
> > Well obviously based on your name (female)
> you
> > have a bias from the get-go. You obviously did
> not
> > read what I said previously about stepping back
> and
> > analyzing the situation before commenting. The
> > United
> > States did not violate womens right to the extent
> of
> > the Taliban but the point was we violated the
> rights
> > of the woman it's that simple.
> > You also obviously do not understand the
> > terminology of cultural relativism. It implies
> that
> > all cultures are in proportion and don't translate
> > that as oh women are mistreated here but aren't
> > here.
> > That means though one culture may violate this
> > groups
> > and another doesn't that other culture violates
> > someone's right in another portion of society. If
> > women's right s are solely violated in Afghanistan
> > then what about the institutional discrimination
> > held
> > against women and minorities in the united states?
>
> > We
> > are just as bad as other countries just in
> different
> > portions of society. If the suicide rate of women
> > tripled there what about the suicide rates of
> youth,
> > those in poverty, those under extreme stress
> > here...do
> > they not count?
> > How can you compare them to Hitler? That
> would
> > be an insult to the nazi's. Now I'm no nazi but
> > they
> > could never reach the height of power that hitler
> > reached. They do not have the complex system
> > established by the nazi's and never will. Hitler
> > makes those fools look like weekend warriors. If
> > you
> > wanna see terrorism look at what the
> Schutzstaffeln,
> > GESTAPO, KRIPO, SD did in nazi germany. That is
> > terror and they knew how to terrorize and put fear
> > in
> > people to control them. The Taliban is nothing.
> > Quintus Cornelius caesar
> >
> In 1923 Hitler was a nut in a Beer Hall that people
> laughed at.
>
> 10 later he was master of Germany
> 7 more years and he was master of most of Europe.
>
> Al Qaeda is farther along than Hitler was in 1923.
>
> Drusus
> Al Qaeda Delenda Est.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Osama's Speech
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 07:49:48 -0700 (PDT)

THAN YOU
quintus cornelius caesar
--- trog99@-------- wrote:
> Salvete Omnes:
>
> Excuse my possible naivity here, but.......
>
> Bin Laden made a speech approximately two weeks ago,
> around the onset
> of the American/British air retaliations.
>
> Alas, I did not keep it, but I'm sure its 'archived'
> somewhere, in
> which he stated that the U.S. could expect "more",
> and that a holy war
> would be launched against the U.S. It was far from a
> love letter.
>
>
>
> .........this is pretty close to an admission of
> guilt, if not
> specifically about the events of Sept. 11, an
> admission of being or
> becoming an active enemy of the U.S. and allies, and
> western freedoms
> in general.
>
> And, if you put this together with the dribs and
> drabs of evidence
> linking the Sept. 11 culprits to Bin Laden and El
> Quaidi, its adds up
> to enough "dope" on the guy to atleast request his
> extradiction for
> questioning if nothing else?
>
> Bene vale,
> Po
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Formosanus' post (was: Re: Dissapointment)
From:	"G. Etcheverius Burdigalus" <burdigalus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 09:16:29 -0700 (PDT)

Salve,
I agree completely that oratory of this quality
should be saved as a tribute to its author and as a
national treasure.
However, rather see the work degraded, its power
and beauty diminished by needless editing, I would
prefer to have its context included with it. Perhaps a
short paragraph describing the world situation
relevent to the work and the original message
Formosanus replied to would suffice to "place" it.
Vale,
Burdigalus
--- Marcus Cassius Julianus <cassius622@-------->
wrote:
> Salve,
>
> What a great idea, Sulla! There *ought* to be a
> "hall of fame" up on
> the website for pieces of outstanding oratory.
>
> There would have to be criteria I suppose. A piece
> would need to be
> nominated in some way, say *not* by the author's two
> best friends or
> Gens members. There might need to be set categories
> as well. (If
> someone posted an outstandingly well done piece on
> why other Citizens
> in NR suck, for instance, it would not enhance our
> community to put
> that up on the site.)
>
> Additionally, the author should get a chance to
> "re-work" a post if
> necessary. Formosanus' post, for instance, was a
> specific reply to
> another thread, and would need a bit of editing to
> make it stand
> up "out of context".
>
> Perhps this might even affect the general content of
> the list. If
> good, thoughtful posts were rewarded, it might
> finally put an end to
> some of the "I didn't call you a Nazi, I just said
> you act exactly
> like a Nazi at all times and in all ways." types of
> posts. People
> might think more, and take more time when they
> speak.
>
> Anyone else think this is a good idea?
>
> Valete,
>
> Marcus Cassius Julianus
> Consul
>
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, "L. Cornelius Sulla Felix"
> <al--------us@-------->
> wrote:
> > Ave,
> >
> > I must add my two cents, in that I too agree with
> M. Apollonius's
> post!
> >
> > Consul maybe we can make a part on the Camneum for
> rhetoric or
> places where we can view pieces of oratory! :)
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Marcus Cassius Julianus
> > To: novaroma@--------
> > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 7:35 PM
> > Subject: [novaroma] Formosanus' post (was: Re:
> Dissapointment)
> >
> >
> > Salvete,
> >
> > Quirites, I am going to mark this day on my
> calendar. It is the
> first
> > time I can ever recall agreeing completely with
> a post made by
> > Formosanus!
> >
> > If I had my way I'd put this particular speech
> up on the Nova
> Roma
> > website, entitled "A Nova Roman View of the
> Current Crisis." I
> find
> > it the most refreshing piece of oratory I've
> seen in quite some
> time.
> >
> > Valete,
> >
> > Marcus Cassius Julianus
> > Consul
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	AW: AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"solinvictus" <caiustarquitius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:12:00 +0200

Ave.
I started with "I Think". Not very open, are we?

Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.

Caius Tarquitius Saturninus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Michael Loughlin [mailto:qccaesar@--------]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 15:40
An: novaroma@--------
Betreff: Re: AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it


Ave,
And decline NR citizens the right to voice their
opinions? Not very open are we?
quintus cornelius caesar
--- solinvictus <caiustarquitius@--------> wrote:
> I think it is not necessary to discuss these topics
> in this Forum and spam
> other people`s computers with loads of mails. This
> is, IMO not a NOVA ROMA
> Topic. What about discussing these things in a
> political Forum? There are
> enough of them in the Internet.
>
> Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.
>
> Caius Taquitius Saturninus
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Teleri ferch Nyfain
> [mailto:rckovak@--------]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 06:02
> An: novaroma@--------
> Betreff: Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
>
>
> Salvete
> I am responding to some remarks by Quintus Cornelius
> Caesar
>
> <<We oppressed women almost just as bad as the
> Taliban. >>
> 1 - who is we? The United States, even 150 years
> ago (before Susan B.
> Anthony and the Saratoga Assembly) never to my
> knowledge forced women to
> wear clothing covering their whole body, with only a
> little crocheted hole
> to see out of. The US never forced women to live in
> houses with the windows
> painted over. These 2 strictures alone are causing
> women to suffer from
> sunlight deprivation. The US (nor any other country
> that I know of, in the
> last 50 years) has condemned women to death for
> teaching other women to read
> and write, although before the Civil War, blacks in
> this country suffered
> this fate. Neither has any other country denied
> women medical care based
> only on their sex. The treatment of women
> (remember, the MAJORITY of the
> population) by the Taliban is unprecendented,
> certainly in modern times. No
> matter that Saudi women might be repressed or the
> females in the Sudan
> subject to mutilation, neither of these countries
> has declared war on their
> women as have the Taliban. In fact if the Taliban
> were to continue the way
> they have, I doubt many women will survive there
> over the next 25 years.
>
> <<It comes down to cultural
> relativism.>>>
> 2 - the treatment of Afghan women by the Taliban is
> NOT cultural, at least
> not the culture these women grew up with.
> Afghanistan was a relatively
> progressive country for Muslim women until the
> Taliban took over. Then over
> night these women, many with advanced degrees and
> careers - lawyers,
> doctors, university professors, business managers,
> chemists, engineers -
> found themselves treated little better than animals,
> reduced (if widowed or
> without male relatives) to begging in the streets to
> feed themselves and
> worse, their children. They are forced to watch
> their daughters growing up
> without an education or chance to live any kind of
> decent life. The suicide
> rate among these women has tripled over the last two
> years. This is NOT
> their culture.
>
> I have hated the Taliban ever since I heard about
> these atrocities committed
> against the women in Afghanistan, which I first
> learned in 1996. I now know
> that on top of all the above, the Taliban have
> committed mass executions
> against the Shiite male population in Afghanistan,
> and other groups. The
> only reason these people aren't "worse" than Hitler?
> They haven't got the
> power of Hitler. But they want it. And if they
> manage, using Bin Laden &
> these terrorist tactics, to gain control of the
> Middle East, they will have
> that power, and the ability to slaughter countless
> millions. The only light
> at the end of that scenario would be that after a
> generation or two the
> population would dwindle away, since the majority of
> women would not
> survive.
>
> Valete,
> Helena Galeria
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	AW: [novaroma] Nova Roman War List
From:	"solinvictus" <caiustarquitius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:22:04 +0200

Ave, and thanks a lot.

Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.

Caius Tarquitius Saturninus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: L. Sicinius Drusus [mailto:lsicinius@--------]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 16:42
An: novaroma@--------
Betreff: [novaroma] Nova Roman War List


Salvete Omnes,

I Have just started a new list, NR War, for citizens
who wish to discuss the War on Terrorism with other
Nova Romans.

It is at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nrwar

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Propraetor America Austrorientalis


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	"G. Etcheverius Burdigalus" <burdigalus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 08:50:57 -0700 (PDT)

Salve Omnes,
One of the truest measures of a free society is its
tolerance for opposing views and unfortunately that
also includes tolerance for mental-midgets like the
one who originated this thread.
As much of a human joke as this person is, he is one
of us. I wouldn't like to see him banished or muzzled.
Not for his sake but for ours, for what we do to him
we inevitably risk happening to us in the future. As
an ex-serviceman his statements angered me to the
extreme. And for the most part the responses already
given on this list I am 100% in agreement emotionally.
But that is giving him too much credence in my life
both as a Canadian ex-serviceman and a Nova Roman.
Perhaps we could take up a collection and buy him a
jester's outfit that he can dress in the macro world
as he lives in Nova Roma - as a fool.
Better yet, the Senate could take the opportunity to
act in a very traditional way and vote him an agnomen.
Might I suggest "Stultus"? What better way to
acknowledge his "importance" to Nova Roma?

Valete,
Burdigalus

--- CJ Sitter <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
> My take on this is just that this guylikes to make
> us mad every
> once in a while when things slow down a bit. I
> still remember
> back when he said the press was showing Pakistanians
>
> cheering at US retaking Kuait instead of at the
> destruction of the
> WTC. I agree with our Consul and the several others
> that are
> calling for this man's dismissal. Someone that
> enjoys wreaking
> havok does not deserve the privilige to be called a
> citizen of New
> Rome.
>
> Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, Michel Loos <loos@q...> wrote:
> > Salvete,
> >
> > one week of continued terrorist attacks against
> one of the
> poorest
> > country in the world, hundreds of innocents dead
> among them
> several
> > world citizens probably thousands of combatants.
> >
> > And here in NovaRoma not one voice of condoleances
> for the
> deads
> > not one voice of condennation of this terrorist
> attack by the USA
> and
> > the UK.
> >
> > I am really desappointed by my fellow concitizens
> in
> NovaRoma (and
> > enjoyed by my fellow brazilians).
> >
> > I hereby express my condoleance to the Afghans and
> all
> humans that were
> > attacked by this new vague of state terrorism. I
> hereby
> condemn the
> > state terrorism at act.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Manius Villius Limitanus
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Civilians in Democracy
From:	radams36@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:15:30 -0000

> > Extil, let's give you the "they voted for the government so they
are
> > legitiment targets" argument. Many foreigners, children and
others
> > were killed in these attacks. People who don't vote. I assume
you
> > still approve?
>
> I don't have a list of the countries all these people belong to,
and
> therefore I cannot be sure any of them were either innocent or
guilty.

Firstly, innocence and guilt are relative terms - nobody falls fully
into either category. To contend otherwise is disingenous at best.

Secondly, the concept that a person's 'innocence' or 'guilt' are a
function of their national citizenship is so imbecilic as to defy
intelligent debate. I'm really curious about where you get the hubris
to believe you have the right to make that determination.

Rufus Iulius Palaeologus




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"CJ Sitter" <otto_von_sitter@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:04:37 -0000

I think what he means is maybe that you just shouldn't discuss
the subject in this particular group. This is a the main Nova
Roma group thread, maybe what he means is if there is a
political forum the discussion should be moved there.

Marcus Cornelius Tiberius

--- In novaroma@--------, Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@--------> wrote:
> Ave,
> And decline NR citizens the right to voice their
> opinions? Not very open are we?
> quintus cornelius caesar
&----------- solinvictus <caiustarquitius@--------&--------wrote:
> > I think it is not necessary to discuss these topics
> > in this Forum and spam
> > other people`s computers with loads of mails. This
> > is, IMO not a NOVA ROMA
> > Topic. What about discussing these things in a
> > political Forum? There are
> > enough of them in the Internet.
> >
> > Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.
> >
> > Caius Taquitius Saturninus
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Teleri ferch Nyfain
> > [mailto:rckovak@--------]
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 06:02
> > An: novaroma@--------
> > Betreff: Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
> >
> >
> > Salvete
> > I am responding to some remarks by Quintus Cornelius
> > Caesar
> >
> > <<We oppressed women almost just as bad as the
> > Taliban. >>
> > 1 - who is we? The United States, even 150 years
> > ago (before Susan B.
> > Anthony and the Saratoga Assembly) never to my
> > knowledge forced women to
> > wear clothing covering their whole body, with only a
> > little crocheted hole
> > to see out of. The US never forced women to live in
> > houses with the windows
> > painted over. These 2 strictures alone are causing
> > women to suffer from
> > sunlight deprivation. The US (nor any other country
> > that I know of, in the
> > last 50 years) has condemned women to death for
> > teaching other women to read
> > and write, although before the Civil War, blacks in
> > this country suffered
> > this fate. Neither has any other country denied
> > women medical care based
> > only on their sex. The treatment of women
> > (remember, the MAJORITY of the
> > population) by the Taliban is unprecendented,
> > certainly in modern times. No
> > matter that Saudi women might be repressed or the
> > females in the Sudan
> > subject to mutilation, neither of these countries
> > has declared war on their
> > women as have the Taliban. In fact if the Taliban
> > were to continue the way
> > they have, I doubt many women will survive there
> > over the next 25 years.
> >
> > <<It comes down to cultural
> > relativism.>>>
> > 2 - the treatment of Afghan women by the Taliban is
> > NOT cultural, at least
> > not the culture these women grew up with.
> > Afghanistan was a relatively
> > progressive country for Muslim women until the
> > Taliban took over. Then over
> > night these women, many with advanced degrees and
> > careers - lawyers,
> > doctors, university professors, business managers,
> > chemists, engineers -
> > found themselves treated little better than animals,
> > reduced (if widowed or
> > without male relatives) to begging in the streets to
> > feed themselves and
> > worse, their children. They are forced to watch
> > their daughters growing up
> > without an education or chance to live any kind of
> > decent life. The suicide
> > rate among these women has tripled over the last two
> > years. This is NOT
> > their culture.
> >
> > I have hated the Taliban ever since I heard about
> > these atrocities committed
> > against the women in Afghanistan, which I first
> > learned in 1996. I now know
> > that on top of all the above, the Taliban have
> > committed mass executions
> > against the Shiite male population in Afghanistan,
> > and other groups. The
> > only reason these people aren't "worse" than Hitler?
> > They haven't got the
> > power of Hitler. But they want it. And if they
> > manage, using Bin Laden &
> > these terrorist tactics, to gain control of the
> > Middle East, they will have
> > that power, and the ability to slaughter countless
> > millions. The only light
> > at the end of that scenario would be that after a
> > generation or two the
> > population would dwindle away, since the majority of
> > women would not
> > survive.
> >
> > Valete,
> > Helena Galeria
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Nova Roman War List
From:	"CJ Sitter" <otto_von_sitter@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:08:28 -0000

Thank you, this discussion is beginning to fill the whole thread.
Isn't this kind of cool though, as Nova Roma grows and evolves,
so to does the number of threads we have.

Marcus Cornelius Tiberius

--- In novaroma@--------, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
>
> I Have just started a new list, NR War, for citizens
> who wish to discuss the War on Terrorism with other
> Nova Romans.
>
> It is at
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nrwar
>
> Valete,
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Propraetor America Austrorientalis
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:29:51 -0000

Salvete:

I do not believe citizen Limitanus to be a waste of space or a human
joke.

The man is a professor of Chemistry which hardly relegates him to a
jester or a mental midget.

I do NOT always agree with him, and some times I've said" "one of
these days Mani........to the MOON!!!!!!!........"

I do not ever want to personal "authority" or lack of humility to
demean a person's personal character, and to decide that they are a
"human joke". Citizen Limitanus is a citizen of Nova Roma as we all
are, and is justly entitled to basic human courtesies.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".....Confusious,
Aristotle, Jesus

My apologies to the populace of Nova Roma...sometimes our office makes
mistakes and lets posts go through in error, when they are intended
otherwise. There have been a 'ton' of posts up for moderation in the
past few days.

Bene valete,
Pompeia Cornelia
Scriba Curatrix Sermonis

In novaroma@--------, "G. Etcheverius Burdigalus" <burdigalus@-------->
wrote:
> Salve Omnes,
> One of the truest measures of a free society is its
> tolerance for opposing views and unfortunately that
> also includes tolerance for mental-midgets like the
> one who originated this thread.
> As much of a human joke as this person is, he is one
> of us. I wouldn't like to see him banished or muzzled.
> Not for his sake but for ours, for what we do to him
> we inevitably risk happening to us in the future. As
> an ex-serviceman his statements angered me to the
> extreme. And for the most part the responses already
> given on this list I am 100% in agreement emotionally.
> But that is giving him too much credence in my life
> both as a Canadian ex-serviceman and a Nova Roman.
> Perhaps we could take up a collection and buy him a
> jester's outfit that he can dress in the macro world
> as he lives in Nova Roma - as a fool.
> Better yet, the Senate could take the opportunity to
> act in a very traditional way and vote him an agnomen.
> Might I suggest "Stultus"? What better way to
> acknowledge his "importance" to Nova Roma?
>
> Valete,
> Burdigalus
>
> --- CJ Sitter <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
> > My take on this is just that this guylikes to make
> > us mad every
> > once in a while when things slow down a bit. I
> > still remember
> > back when he said the press was showing Pakistanians
> >
> > cheering at US retaking Kuait instead of at the
> > destruction of the
> > WTC. I agree with our Consul and the several others
> > that are
> > calling for this man's dismissal. Someone that
> > enjoys wreaking
> > havok does not deserve the privilige to be called a
> > citizen of New
> > Rome.
> >
> > Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
> >
> > --- In novaroma@--------, Michel Loos <loos@q...> wrote:
> > > Salvete,
> > >
> > > one week of continued terrorist attacks against
> > one of the
> > poorest
> > > country in the world, hundreds of innocents dead
> > among them
> > several
> > > world citizens probably thousands of combatants.
> > >
> > > And here in NovaRoma not one voice of condoleances
> > for the
> > deads
> > > not one voice of condennation of this terrorist
> > attack by the USA
> > and
> > > the UK.
> > >
> > > I am really desappointed by my fellow concitizens
> > in
> > NovaRoma (and
> > > enjoyed by my fellow brazilians).
> > >
> > > I hereby express my condoleance to the Afghans and
> > all
> > humans that were
> > > attacked by this new vague of state terrorism. I
> > hereby
> > condemn the
> > > state terrorism at act.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Manius Villius Limitanus
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Osama's Guilt
From:	amg@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:50:18 -0000

Salve Quinte Corneli Caesar

> > > Osama Bin Laden is guilty as sin for terrorist
> > > assaults on the United states and has been linked to
> > > multiple attacks on us as well as in france and the
> > > assassination of the former egyptian president. As I
> > > said before we don't need proof to try him just put
> > > the guy on tv and he does the provision of evidence
> > > himself. The man is going to die whether processed
> > > through the CJ system or taken out my special
> > > operations. As president Bush previously stated there
> > > are no negotiations we just want him handed over it is
> > > that simple.
> > > Quintus Cornelius caesar
Let me play the role of Socrates in here =).
Isn't it true that even if a man confesses a crime, it must be proved
that he is really guilty? This is the way I understand the US legal
system, at least from what I see in the TV series. =)
Imagine that the man was mad and someone else had committed the
crime. Better: Imagine that some other groups had committed the crime
and that Osama Bin Laden, mad with envy had declared himself
responsible for the act.
Consider also the fact that terrorist attacks often generate multiple
claims of responsibility on the part of rival terrorist groups.

So, while I believe that Bin Laden is responsible for the training
and financing of the terrorists (I'm not so sure that he knew the
details of the operation as there is the possibility that after
training the terrorist cells act on their own in order to avoid
detection), the western powers cannot justify the execution of the
man in legal terms. The western powers must admit that this action
was waged to protect their strategical interests and population
independently of international law.

Is it so difficult to admit? It shouldn't be. Since the beginning of
civilization, international law is fake. The states manipulate it
according to their interests since the beginning. And this practice
continues in the 21st century. The moslem terrorists kill civilians
claiming that their own civilians are killed by the allies of the US,
namely Israel. On the other hand, the UN rather than an institution
serving the great powers of the world? Just see who has the right of
veto in the Security Council and you will discover that smaller
countries must accept the decisions of the big, period. But it was
like this already when there was no UN, so you should not be shocked.
We are just watching the continuation of History.

So, just be rational and calmly watch the theatre of Humanity as it
is. Don't paint it with false symbols of fake universal value and
virtue. The way an event is interpreted depends on the side you are
fighting for. It's just a question of interest, not of Democracy, not
of human rights. These only have value when they also have
strategical value. Otherwise no one bothers. The western powers were
always very bothered with, for example:

- Cuba (whose leader, despite being a tyrant, is nevertheless a
competent tyrant in the true ancient greek sense of the word:
improving education, health services, etc.)
- Iraq
- Serbia
- Afghanistan
- China
- North Korea
- Russia (before it became a virtual democracy subject to the free
market, even if Tchetchnians are killed and denied the right for
autodetermination)
- Angola (when it was under Cuban and Russian influence)

But Democracy and human rights never interested them in:
- Saudi Arabia
- El Salvador
- Honduras
- Colombia
- Turkey
- Israel
- Chile (before it became democratic)
- Argentina (before it became democratic)
- Angola (since the VERY SAME CORRUPT Angolan government became a
false democracy and a friend with the west)

Conclusion: go and attack the Taliban. Go and kill Bin Laden. And for
you who are US soldiers or their family I sincerely wish you and/or
your military relatives to come back in safety and unharmed. But
please have the conscience that no one is serving abstract virtues.
The military are serving the interests of their country (YOUR
interests and YOUR government's interests) just like the roman
legionaries served Rome and the Caesars. And I don't say this for you
to be ashamed. There is nothing to be ashamed, for you have not
chosen to be born in the country you were born, you have not chosen
your Horoscope, you have not chosen your fate, which includes living
in a great western power with economical and strategical interests
and corresponding rivals and even enemies in all the world. I say
this because it is the truth you must inexorably accept. Just like
the Afghans and others are inevitably subject to their fate, which
includes a severe islamic education, poverty, civil war, etc..
Just try not to accept this war with passion, justifying the
irrational with a simulacrum of rationality, taking the attribute for
the essence, the transitory for the eternal, the mundane for the
divine. Accept it as inevitable albeit unpleasant, and you will
indeed be among the fairest people in the world, past and present.

Di vos incolumes custodiant
Antonius Gryllus Graecus








Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 12:01:51 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
Well this is the main list where all of Nova Roma
"congegates" if all citizens cannot exchange their
views here then the list is really futile to have
especially if NR is to call itself a "nation" of any
proportion.
Quintus Cornelius Caesar

--- CJ Sitter <otto_von_sitter@--------> wrote:
> I think what he means is maybe that you just
> shouldn't discuss
> the subject in this particular group. This is a the
> main Nova
> Roma group thread, maybe what he means is if there
> is a
> political forum the discussion should be moved
> there.
>
> Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, Michael Loughlin
> <qccaesar@--------> wrote:
> > Ave,
> > And decline NR citizens the right to voice
> their
> > opinions? Not very open are we?
> > quintus cornelius caesar
&--------&----------- solinvictus <caiustarquitius@--------&--------wrote:
> > > I think it is not necessary to discuss these
> topics
> > > in this Forum and spam
> > > other people`s computers with loads of mails.
> This
> > > is, IMO not a NOVA ROMA
> > > Topic. What about discussing these things in a
> > > political Forum? There are
> > > enough of them in the Internet.
> > >
> > > Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.
> > >
> > > Caius Taquitius Saturninus
> > >
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Teleri ferch Nyfain
> > > [mailto:rckovak@--------]
> > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 06:02
> > > An: novaroma@--------
> > > Betreff: Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
> > >
> > >
> > > Salvete
> > > I am responding to some remarks by Quintus
> Cornelius
> > > Caesar
> > >
> > > <<We oppressed women almost just as bad as the
> > > Taliban. >>
> > > 1 - who is we? The United States, even 150
> years
> > > ago (before Susan B.
> > > Anthony and the Saratoga Assembly) never to my
> > > knowledge forced women to
> > > wear clothing covering their whole body, with
> only a
> > > little crocheted hole
> > > to see out of. The US never forced women to
> live in
> > > houses with the windows
> > > painted over. These 2 strictures alone are
> causing
> > > women to suffer from
> > > sunlight deprivation. The US (nor any other
> country
> > > that I know of, in the
> > > last 50 years) has condemned women to death for
> > > teaching other women to read
> > > and write, although before the Civil War, blacks
> in
> > > this country suffered
> > > this fate. Neither has any other country denied
> > > women medical care based
> > > only on their sex. The treatment of women
> > > (remember, the MAJORITY of the
> > > population) by the Taliban is unprecendented,
> > > certainly in modern times. No
> > > matter that Saudi women might be repressed or
> the
> > > females in the Sudan
> > > subject to mutilation, neither of these
> countries
> > > has declared war on their
> > > women as have the Taliban. In fact if the
> Taliban
> > > were to continue the way
> > > they have, I doubt many women will survive there
> > > over the next 25 years.
> > >
> > > <<It comes down to cultural
> > > relativism.>>>
> > > 2 - the treatment of Afghan women by the Taliban
> is
> > > NOT cultural, at least
> > > not the culture these women grew up with.
> > > Afghanistan was a relatively
> > > progressive country for Muslim women until the
> > > Taliban took over. Then over
> > > night these women, many with advanced degrees
> and
> > > careers - lawyers,
> > > doctors, university professors, business
> managers,
> > > chemists, engineers -
> > > found themselves treated little better than
> animals,
> > > reduced (if widowed or
> > > without male relatives) to begging in the
> streets to
> > > feed themselves and
> > > worse, their children. They are forced to watch
> > > their daughters growing up
> > > without an education or chance to live any kind
> of
> > > decent life. The suicide
> > > rate among these women has tripled over the last
> two
> > > years. This is NOT
> > > their culture.
> > >
> > > I have hated the Taliban ever since I heard
> about
> > > these atrocities committed
> > > against the women in Afghanistan, which I first
> > > learned in 1996. I now know
> > > that on top of all the above, the Taliban have
> > > committed mass executions
> > > against the Shiite male population in
> Afghanistan,
> > > and other groups. The
> > > only reason these people aren't "worse" than
> Hitler?
> > > They haven't got the
> > > power of Hitler. But they want it. And if they
> > > manage, using Bin Laden &
> > > these terrorist tactics, to gain control of the
> > > Middle East, they will have
> > > that power, and the ability to slaughter
> countless
> > > millions. The only light
> > > at the end of that scenario would be that after
> a
> > > generation or two the
> > > population would dwindle away, since the
> majority of
> > > women would not
> > > survive.
> > >
> > > Valete,
> > > Helena Galeria
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > > removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> > http://personals.yahoo.com
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:19:44 +0200

M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Civitibus S.P.D.

Permit me to thank all of those who were so kind as to put aside their
normal animosity towards me and praise my previous post. It was kind of
you all. I am also delighted that Pontifex Graecus considers me less
politically correct than President Bush, as I abhor political
correctness. But let me say that I know perfectly well that Islam has
done things which were humane and progressive in their time, such as
forbid the infanticide of female babies and treat Jews better than
Christians did on the average. And every Moslem I have ever met (as well
as every Iranian, Pakistani, Iraqi, and Turk of all religions) seemed a
nice person. We do not need to develop prejudices not based on reality.
Nonetheless, there are criticisms and comments about Islamic culture
that deserve to be made in the interests of truth. They were not
intended in an unfriendly manner.

I think we are fortunate to have a representative of the pacifist
viewpoint here in our Limitanus. I do not happen to aggree with him, but
it is instructive to have someone to present this point of view with
true conviction and give us all cause to think. And I am sure that it is
not his intent to incite or be unreasonably provocative, but to
sincerely stand up for his moral convictions as he sees them. Thinking
out our point of view in a slightly larger context of thought will hurt
none of us, either.

Those of us who love peace but are nevertheless not pacifists usually
hold to this intermediate position because we recognise that in addition
to the virtues of peace there are those of justice and freedom. I think
we all desire all three, but sometimes awkward situations arise where it
is difficult not to use military means to secure the justice and
freedom. In that context the question is whether someone of Limitanus'
persuasion can offer us a viable alternative route to justice and
freedom that avoids military force. I am inclined to think that he
cannot. (Which is regrettable.)

In the light of that, I would like to respond to his message below with
a few comments (I am "MAF"):


From: Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Subject: Re: Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to
the afghans

On Mon, 2001-10-15 at 14:07, Michael Loughlin wrote:
> Ave,
> well terrorism is apparently thw ord of the day
> here. But people seem to be using the term blindly
> without consideration of a definition. Terrosism has
> a four part definition: 1) minimum of 3-4 people dead,
> 2.) innocent victims, 3.)act of violence in a public
> theatre, 4.) political objective.

Great we use the same definition, we should be able to talk on solid
bases.

> Now if one wanted
> to they could legitimately argue our violence is an
> act of terrorism. HOWEVER, we are not the actor in
> this case but the reactor.

Partially agreed. There is something that incomodes me with
the WTC tragedy: No revendication and instead denial of any
implication by both Bin Laden and the Al Qaeda. Where is the
political objective if they really did it?

MAF: The upset caused to the U.S. and the world must be very pleasing to
Bin Laden and his
supporters. The feeling of Islamic power and humiliation of a perceived
enemy of Islam. The harm
to the "Western" economy. The already increased pressure to move talks
ahead in Palestine and that
in a manner that has cut Israel out of the Coalition against Terrorism
and made it jittery about American
support for a peace settlement that meets its minimum requirements.
These political objectives are plausible and he is even achieving some
of them, alas.

Although there was a denial of guilt, that was presumably just a
self-defensive measure. Subsequent
public statements warning Moslems and the innocent to avoid tall
buildings and flying do not square with
the statements of innocence. Furthermore, Bin Laden expressed his moral
approval of the attack at the time
when he denied that he had done it. /


No proof either of their implication even with all the policial effort
direct to one goal: find proofs against Bin Laden (and not resolve the
case). With all partial evidence we have another group could well
have manipulated the fanatics which commited that crime.

MAF: Apparently the proofs exist for all practical purposes. The U.S.
government in the end did not make them
public for the fairly obvious reason that the detailed nature of the
proofs would have compromised U.S. information ources,
which are probably still very nuch needed to keep watch over the
situation. One does not name one's own spies to an
enemy nation or terrorist group, or give exact details on how
confidential intelligence information is collected or how thorough it is
in various specifics. The evidence was reported to have satisfied the
President of Pakistan, the last nation to keep diplomatic ties with
Taliban Afghanistan.



> it could be said that
> terrorists react but they tend to instigate reactions
> like this world wide. Terrorism comes in all forms
> state sponsored and group sponsored. It is just a
> matter of the justification behind the act and whether
> the group commands the power to justify politically
> throughout the world and receive support.

Totally agreed, another form to remove the name of terrorism
is to win, after that the "terrorists" become "partisans".
This already happened to Bin Laden: terrorist for the soviets partisan
for the afghans and the USA, still a partisan for the afghans but a
terrorist for the USA: he is the same man, same ideas , same way
of action.

MAF: Same way of action? No, before he was helping Afghanis win freedom
from Russian power, an action intended to secure freedom for a nation,
and one which earned him the affection and respect of the Taliban.
Attacking Americans - non-belligerants against Afghanistan - thousands
of miles away, as he did in various locations and most recently in the
U.S. itself, is a very different matter, a matter as different as
defence and offence.

And we would be going far astray if we confused things in the
relativistic way presented above. Good is good and bad is bad, and part
of the way to determine which is which is based on the intent. To help
people liberate their country from foreign domination (especially from a
then most repressive Soviet Union) is generally a laudable aim, and to
do so makes one a "freedom fighter". To carry out surprise mass murder
of civilians in the world's most powerful democratic country, ultimately
because he personally dislikes its non-Islamic majority religious
preferences, is to be a "terrorist". Bin Laden has been both by
objective assessment. We might praise him for one, but we justifiably
condemn him for the other.

Indeed, a successful freedom fighter may rise to be a respected national
president or prime minister of some country eventually. One thinks of
South Africa and Israel. However, one might well ask of what country Bin
Laden could hope to lead - and that is because he is now no longer
trying to liberate any country from domestic and foreign oppression
through his acts, but simply to cause harm, even in the most reckless
and cruel of means, to the non-Islamic civilised order of the world
which he despises. /


> So in
> essence our terrorism is justified. Whether you call
> me a bigot etc. for this I say a crime has been
> committed on US soil and people must pay and if that
> means the loss of life of members of Al Qaeda and
> Afghans then so be it.

A crime has been commited on US soil, the responsible should be
punished, we totally agree on that point. We perhaps disagree on
the sentence to applied (by principle for me: no killing) but that
is not the point here.

MAF: I also disagree with capital punishment - not that Bin Laden does
not probably *deserve* it, but just because I don't think a civilised
nation should do it.


The last time a terrorist crime killed hundreds of people in the USA
the responsible had a fair trial were all rights of the defense were
respected (even delaying the execution of the sentence in order to be
totally sure of this point), is anything similar offered to Bin Laden?
Would, with todays evidences Bin Laden be condemned in a fair trial?
I really doubt it.

MAF: I completely disagree. Of course he would receive a fair trial in
the U.S. He might receive a fair trial in any civilised nation in the
world, including Brazil, but since the crimes occurred on U.S. soil,
that is the natural jurisdiction for the trial. Naturally this is "being
offered"! None of us has seen the full evidence against him for
security reasons, as I mentioned above, but I imagine that the evidence
is very impressive. /


Would an american hero (Bin Laden IS an afghan Hero) be extradited with
such little evidence of his implication in a crime let s say in Cuba or
China, again I doubt it. With solid proofs, yes I suppose he would be
extradited, but not on the bases of so little indirect evidences.

MAF: As I say, the evidence is better than you make out, and he could be
tried for other terrorist acts for which the evidence is in no doubt and
for which he would long since have received the maximum punishment of
the criminal justice system if he had not been sheltered from justice by
the Taliban. Public statements by his group are such as to be a virtual
admission of the crime in any case.

But the cases you give are not parallel. No one in his right mind would
suppose that a person would receive a fair trial in China or Cuba or be
free from torture there. Bin Laden, on the contrary, would be given an
honest trial in a civilised manner in the United States. /

> But if anyone is gonna label
> the US terrorists in the future step back for a minute
> and look at the "terrorism" your respective countries
> have committed against other countries as well as
> their own people. If anyone here wishes to dispute
> that I will gladly point out the terrorist behaviors
> from each of your nations. No country is without its
> fault

No country is without faults (well perhaps some micronations like San
Marino etc.). Surely Brasil cannot be proud of its behaviour for example

in the Paraguay war (90% of the paraguaian population vanished in the
conflict). But since no country is without fault if for this we all stay

still against injustices, they will go on for ever.

MAF: But it is sloppy to label war "terrorism". Two terms exist because
two distinguishable realities exist. Some wars are basically good, some
basically bad, and some a mixture. I would be inclined to say that any
terrorism directed primarily at civilians is *always* bad. /


> and people who do not reside their have no right
> to criticize that nation for its actions when they
> clearly do not understand the people, culture, and the
> reasons why.

Here we totally disagree, to the opposite I think it is the duty of all
humans to stand up when another human is injusticed. He has also the
duty to try to understand the people, culture and the reasons why.

MAF: I completely aggree to the Nth degree. /


In fact it does not seem to me this effort is done in order to
understand the afghansand their extremely high sense of hospitality,
which even without any juridical consideration pushes them to dye
instead of delivering over an estimated guest to his ennemies.

MAF: In fact the religious leadership council of Afghanistan voted that
it would be very nice if he voluntarily left the country. I do not think
that they are defending him out of a fanatical devotion to hospitality.
It seems much more likely that they have a shared fanaticism in hating
the United States and most of what it stands for, so that they actively
approve of his deeds of murder and perhaps would have done them
themselves if they were as efficient in organising such things.

I think that we also have to admit one very probable thing: the Taliban
almost surely knew that Osama bin Laden was up to nefarious activities.
They claimed that he was cut off from communications with the outside
world, and probably must have known that in fact he was cheating on
those restrictions. It is hard to imagine their not keeping an eye on
their esteemed guest, knowing that he was accustomed to act as a
terrorist and a world-class player with his own priorities. Presumably
knowing much if not all of what he was up to, they were in all
probability just playing games in refusing to give him up without
"proof". Maybe I am wrong and Bin Laden actually did keep the Taliban in
the dark - but I do not really think so. They colluded. Only the degree
is in real doubt.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Extradition of Osama
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 12:05:57 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
You suggest an international tribunal as a means
to try Bin Laden but seriously would he receive a fair
trial? When Adolf Eichmann was snatched from
Argentina a nd illegally extradited back to Israel and
tried there did he receive a fair trial? In a state
that is predominatly Jewish and national flag has the
star of David on it...I don't think so. Nuremburg
still was not fair to the other hierarchy and yet
those men were tried under French, British, and
American standards. There is no place in this world
where he will receive anything remotely close to being
called a "fair trial".
Quintus Cornelius caesar
--- QFabiusMaxmi@-------- wrote:
> Salvete
> As someone who has been involved in scenario design
> overseeing of several
> versions of the extraction of bin Laden from his
> host country, I have to say
> the US would prefer that he was handed over to US to
> stand trial. That way
> some form of legitimacy would remain.
> A snatch scenario is fraught with problems, and
> would only be used as a last
> resort. Ultimately the US hopes a 2k bomb has bin
> Laden's name on it.
>
> Removing bin Laden does not solve terrorism, anymore
> then removing the head
> of the Cartel solved the drug problem. However, by
> his removal, he makes the
> Base a little more vulnerable. Also it helps dry up
> operating money,
> critical money for expenses the terrorists need to
> continue in today's
> society. Because things have tightened up
> considerably. It will cost more
> money, and a larger network to continue to operate
> as before, and the less
> money they have, the harder to operate and the
> greater likelihood of
> detection and capture.
>
> Could he receive a fair trial if captured?
> Doubtful, if here in the US. An
> international tribunal under the auspices of the UN
> would be best. But hard
> to organize. The Arabs themselves could try him,
> especially Saudi Arabia,
> who have arrest warrants for him if he
> ever returned. But he has powerful friends among the
> Arabs and could be
> acquitted. This is why everybody hopes that he is
> killed in the fighting,
> his body identified, and we go on to the next step.
>
> Valete
> Q. Fabius Maximus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] ADMIN: List Topics
From:	justicecmo@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:44:59 -0000

Salve,

I just want to post a quick note in response to those people calling
for the topic of Afghanistan/Bin Laden/etc. to end.

While everyone is free to read or delete whatever posts they choose,
it does not fall to individual members of this list to try and cease
a discussion. In point of fact, the list guidelines specifically
state that if you are having a problem with a certain thread or would
like to request that a topic ends, the proper course of action is to
contact the Curatrix and discuss the matter.

To date I have seen several pleas for the topic to end, but no one
has contacted me privately. Therefore, for those of you getting
irritated at being told to "hush", ignore it. Until and unless you
hear from myself or my scriba and are directed to end the topic
<which, incidentally, we have no plans of doing> go about your
business and don't worry about it.

On a final note, members are always free to start their own lists
that are "topic specific" such as the NRWar and NRLand lists. That
does not, however, put any obligation on members *not* to discuss
those issues here.

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	amg@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:45:57 -0000

Salve M. Apolloni Formosane

> Permit me to thank all of those who were so kind as to put aside
>their
> normal animosity towards me and praise my previous post. It was
kind of
> you all. I am also delighted that Pontifex Graecus considers me less
> politically correct than President Bush, as I abhor political
> correctness.
I did it kindly too =). Just to be sure that you interpreted
correctly.

Vale bene
Graecus




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Re: Desapointment with my fellow
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 16:15:04 -0400

Salve,

Citizen Limitanus called the retaliation to the terrorist events as a
terrorist act in it's self. It is one thing to state that you wish there was
another way to a resolution, or that your heart goes out to the innocent
people who will be killed. It is a whole other realm to call the western
acts in Afghanistan a terrorist act. I find that this is completely ignorant
to what we are trying to do, and to those who are putting their lives in
danger for this cause.

Limitanus can have his views, yes. Although I have a hard time believing
that he didn't have intentions to provoke citizens. If he truly meant no
harm then I do hope he will watch the wording of his posts on sensitive
topics in the future.

Calling a relation to terrorist attacks terrorism... Get real. The US is
dropping food rations over there so called ³terrorist victims². Something
tells me that this was the last thing that was on the minds of those
monsters that flew those planes on September 11th. Limitanus obviously has
no idea what terrorism is if he truly meant no harm.

Vale,

"Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro sum mater ab vitualis"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Provincia Legatus Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Gens Claudia
Canada Orientalis Provincia

Canada Orientalis Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/canorien

Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
--



>M. Apollonius Formosanus at bvm3@-------- wrote:
>
> I think we are fortunate to have a representative of the pacifist
> viewpoint here in our Limitanus. I do not happen to aggree with him, but
> it is instructive to have someone to present this point of view with
> true conviction and give us all cause to think. And I am sure that it is
> not his intent to incite or be unreasonably provocative, but to
> sincerely stand up for his moral convictions as he sees them. Thinking
> out our point of view in a slightly larger context of thought will hurt
> none of us, either.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Re: Desapointment with my fellow citizens/condoleance to the afghans
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 13:34:26 -0700 (PDT)

What no one here seems to realize is that by
definition out military attacks on Afghanistan are by
definition terrorist attacks. So in that sense he is
correct whether people like it or not. Now all of you
who seem to like dictionaries can go and look up what
terrorism is defined as in the dictionary but I can
assure you that you will be led astray by that
definition. What matters is the political and
criminal justice definition of terrorism and that will
match up to exactly what happened on 9-11-01 and our
assault on the Afghans will meet the definition of
terrorism. I am not wasting my time anymore
explaining this because you all don't read the clearly
defined definitions of terms i have provided nor
undersatnd the rules of war-jus ad bellum/jus ad
bello...if you want look up the terms hijacking and in
terrorem in Barrons law dictionary and you're all
set...for the rest of you stick blindly to you views
based solely on emotion because as far as I'm
concerned I'm sick and tired of this debate and can no
longer stand because NO ONE even considers others
opinions to be valid but sticks blindly to their own
and then has the gall to say they're wrong they're
this and that they should be censured....smart way to
end a growing organization...so from now on I refuse
to take part in this debate for unless people open up
their sewn eyes it is worth no ones time to discuss
anything...c ya
quintus cornelius caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Osama's Guilt
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	17 Oct 2001 18:19:49 -0200

Salve Salix,

when your country asked the UK for the extradition of the undeniably
guilty Augusto Pinochet it was refused by their supreme court for a
reason that does not exist neither in your right, neither in chilian
right.

Did Spain use this pretext to launch an Invencible Armada against the
UK? No, of course not. But that is what we are seeing today done by the
UK and the USA against the Taliban.

Of course their is no need of a trial in absentia before asking for
extradition, but there is an internationnaly recognized need of proofs
or strong evidences in order to ask and obtain an extradition.

Todays situation is very similar to the 1914 situation.
In 1914, Serbia accepted to put all its policial efforts against the
perpretrators of the Sarajevo attentate, but Austria-Hungria wanted
more, they emitted an ultimatum asking for free action of the
Austro-Hungarian police in Serbian territory. Over 4 years of war
resulted from this. And finally and the Trianon Treaty (1922 or 23),
Austria-Hungary was recognized responsible for this war and severely
punished by its demembration.

Of course this will not happen to the USA/UK coalition because if it is
possible that they won t win this war, they securely won t loose it and
nobody will ever impose such sanctions upon them (nor would they be
fair, just like the post WWI treaties were _all_ totally unfair).


Manius Villius Limitanus

> If I understand you correctly you demand Ben Laden to be found guilty
> before he is handed over as the only way of avoiding an injustice.
> That means that to be found guilty in absentia is the only "just"
> possibility. You will forgive me I find this stance funny.
>
> Alas, this is a micronation concerned with reviving ancient roman
> values. The better aspects of roman legislation are undoubtedly part
> of these. It seems that your views are quite opposed to them.
>
> I would sugest you to reconsider the motives you could possibly have
> had for joining a community whose goals so blatantly seem to
> contradict yours, specially the inmoderate trolling of the main list.
>
> As to the handing over of Ben Laden I do not see why anyone could
> possibly object to it. In spite of not being a U.S. citizen I believe
> I know enough about this "undeniably imperfect but nevertheless
> admirable" country to be sure that he would get a fair trial if he
> were judged there.
>
> Yes, he would get the best possible defendants, paid for by the U.S.
> government (not that he isn't able to afford these, or so I've
> heard). Anybody would be able to see for him or herself if the trial
> was fair or not, as I'd bet it would be shown on T.V. (worldwide).
>
> Criminals are extradited to be judged every day, and I do not find it
> unfair. Indeed it is often the only way of avoiding impunity and
> further crimes.
>
> It is occasionaly the case that some country refuses to extradite a
> person or group arguing that he would not receive a fair trial
> abroad, or that the alleged crimes aren't such.
>
> This position may be justified in some cases, such as "crimes of
> opinion". I do not think this applies to the leader of Al Quaida.
>
> As I see this situation, the U.S. has taken every possible and
> realistic diplomatic and otherwise peaceful steps to avoid more mass
> murders of its citizens.
>
> Having failed in these attempts, and due to the inmense risk posed by
> the continued existence of such a ruthless and powerful terrorist
> organisation, the U.S. has chosen to pursue them by declaring war on
> the self-alleged government that harbors them. Their efforts to avoid
> innocent victims are undeniable, and more so when compared with the
> terrorists' actions.
>
> At worst the only semiharsh judgement I could deem appropiate would
> be that the U.S. government chooses the possibility of causing (as
> few as possible) innocent foreign victims to avoid (potentially very
> numerous) innocent U.S. victims. I'd say this is any country's
> prerrogative.
>
> Thus I'd maintain in this case that "condemning both equally" or
> otherwise comparing both sides is not "neutrality" but insidious
> propaganda.
>
> Mentioning crimes against humanity commited centuries or decades ago
> in an attempt to justify the Taliban or making them look "less evil"
> is futile, as the only thing you can do about them now is to learn
> from them and teach the next generations to condemn them too.
>
> Vivat devotio hispanica.
>
> Marcus Salix Saverius
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Subject:	Re: AW: AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 12:11:37 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
I say "now very open" because the more and more I
read people's posts about can't say this/don't say
that/this shouldn't be said it makes NR sound like a
dictatorship and jeez some democratic system
especially since there is voting. If people can't
voice there opinions then again this list is futile.
I can no longer stand the arrogant snobs in this
organization who think they can play god and control
what people say by telling people they should do this
or say this. It makes NR seem so unappealing and not
worth being a part of
quintus cornelius caesar
--- solinvictus <caiustarquitius@--------> wrote:
> Ave.
> I started with "I Think". Not very open, are we?
>
> Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.
>
> Caius Tarquitius Saturninus
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Michael Loughlin [mailto:qccaesar@--------]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 15:40
> An: novaroma@--------
> Betreff: Re: AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
>
>
> Ave,
> And decline NR citizens the right to voice their
> opinions? Not very open are we?
> quintus cornelius caesar
> --- solinvictus <caiustarquitius@--------> wrote:
> > I think it is not necessary to discuss these
> topics
> > in this Forum and spam
> > other people`s computers with loads of mails. This
> > is, IMO not a NOVA ROMA
> > Topic. What about discussing these things in a
> > political Forum? There are
> > enough of them in the Internet.
> >
> > Bonis nocet, qui malis parcit.
> >
> > Caius Taquitius Saturninus
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Teleri ferch Nyfain
> > [mailto:rckovak@--------]
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2001 06:02
> > An: novaroma@--------
> > Betreff: Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
> >
> >
> > Salvete
> > I am responding to some remarks by Quintus
> Cornelius
> > Caesar
> >
> > <<We oppressed women almost just as bad as the
> > Taliban. >>
> > 1 - who is we? The United States, even 150 years
> > ago (before Susan B.
> > Anthony and the Saratoga Assembly) never to my
> > knowledge forced women to
> > wear clothing covering their whole body, with only
> a
> > little crocheted hole
> > to see out of. The US never forced women to live
> in
> > houses with the windows
> > painted over. These 2 strictures alone are
> causing
> > women to suffer from
> > sunlight deprivation. The US (nor any other
> country
> > that I know of, in the
> > last 50 years) has condemned women to death for
> > teaching other women to read
> > and write, although before the Civil War, blacks
> in
> > this country suffered
> > this fate. Neither has any other country denied
> > women medical care based
> > only on their sex. The treatment of women
> > (remember, the MAJORITY of the
> > population) by the Taliban is unprecendented,
> > certainly in modern times. No
> > matter that Saudi women might be repressed or the
> > females in the Sudan
> > subject to mutilation, neither of these countries
> > has declared war on their
> > women as have the Taliban. In fact if the Taliban
> > were to continue the way
> > they have, I doubt many women will survive there
> > over the next 25 years.
> >
> > <<It comes down to cultural
> > relativism.>>>
> > 2 - the treatment of Afghan women by the Taliban
> is
> > NOT cultural, at least
> > not the culture these women grew up with.
> > Afghanistan was a relatively
> > progressive country for Muslim women until the
> > Taliban took over. Then over
> > night these women, many with advanced degrees and
> > careers - lawyers,
> > doctors, university professors, business managers,
> > chemists, engineers -
> > found themselves treated little better than
> animals,
> > reduced (if widowed or
> > without male relatives) to begging in the streets
> to
> > feed themselves and
> > worse, their children. They are forced to watch
> > their daughters growing up
> > without an education or chance to live any kind of
> > decent life. The suicide
> > rate among these women has tripled over the last
> two
> > years. This is NOT
> > their culture.
> >
> > I have hated the Taliban ever since I heard about
> > these atrocities committed
> > against the women in Afghanistan, which I first
> > learned in 1996. I now know
> > that on top of all the above, the Taliban have
> > committed mass executions
> > against the Shiite male population in Afghanistan,
> > and other groups. The
> > only reason these people aren't "worse" than
> Hitler?
> > They haven't got the
> > power of Hitler. But they want it. And if they
> > manage, using Bin Laden &
> > these terrorist tactics, to gain control of the
> > Middle East, they will have
> > that power, and the ability to slaughter countless
> > millions. The only light
> > at the end of that scenario would be that after a
> > generation or two the
> > population would dwindle away, since the majority
> of
> > women would not
> > survive.
> >
> > Valete,
> > Helena Galeria
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Osama's Guilt
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 15:22:31 -0700 (PDT)

I personally believe that the United States is one big
giant hypocrite. Now I am American and proud to be
but the system here is so hypocritical. We are
willing to subject everyone to international
tribunal's...The Hague...but not ourselves. What kind
of system is that? We claim to represent justice,
fairness, equality, etc...but how come we get involved
in Kosovo and charge Milosevic with war crimes but
don't get involved more in Ireland where the British
government has committed war crimes against the Irish
who were stripped of their lands, had their religion
suppressed, and those who rebelled killed. It is not
terrorism when the British commit crimes against the
Irish but when they rebel under the name of the IRA to
win back their land and sovereignty they are deemed
terrorists. If we charge others to that tribunal why
don't we put our soldiers to it and put our soldiers
in the NATO military force instead of refusal to? In
My-Lai (sorry if mispelled) we had an officer Cally, I
believe, who annihilated a complete generation and
people from this earth out of rage...why don't we put
him before this tribunal...the nazi's did it (though
to a larger scale) but they did. We are just as
guilty and this world needs to be fair and not so
hypocritical.
quintus cornelius caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: AW: AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:33:39 -0400

Salve,

>>I say "now very open" because the more and more I read people's posts
about can't say this/don't say that/this shouldn't be said it makes NR sound
like a dictatorship>>

Hmm. I suggest you acquaint yourself with the role of the Curator Sermo. I
would also suggest you *read* the emails posted. Most notably one entitled
"ADMIN: List Topics". The fact that you equate one or two requests to drop
a topic, made from folks with no actual authority to see that you do so,
with a dictatorship is..........odd. I'll leave it at that.

>>If people can't voice there opinions then again this list is futile.>>

Hmm. I would suggest you ponder the fact that no one's opinions are being
censored or stifled. Not even your, shall we say, *strident* opinions.

> I can no longer stand the arrogant snobs in this organization>>

Oh joy! Insults are just *such* a display of wit and they do *so* much to
foster communication. Sigh.

>>who think they can play god and control what people say by telling people
they should do this or say this.>>

Hmm. Well, since the only two people with the specific legal authority to
tell you whether what you say here is acceptable or not are both females,
the term would be goddess. Then again, *no one* in any authority has made
any such statements so the point is moot.

>>It makes NR seem so unappealing and not worth being a part of>>

Oh I quite disagree. Individuals such as yourself who engage in
name-calling and rudeness when you don't like what someone else says make
for an unpleasant environment.

Thankfully, the vast majority of our members do not follow your poor
example.

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis
> quintus cornelius caesar




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	RE: AW: AW: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 15:41:24 -0700 (PDT)

Well you can call me rude and say I insult others but
frankly to tell you the truth I have been the only one
who has provided substantial factual information on
the issue being argued. You took my words out of
context. If my opinions are that "strident" etc then
why has no one else provided any factual information
concerning the attack on Afghans and our criminal
justce system? If I offeneded anyone I'm sorry but
since its started might as well continue down the road
to ruin then well get a life if you have to criticize
someone when they have provided factual material
proving people wrong time and again and all people do
in response is base there opinions off of emotions
instead of factual material. goodbye!!!!!
quintus cornelius caesar
--- JusticeCMO <justicecmo@--------> wrote:
> Salve,
>
> >>I say "now very open" because the more and more I
> read people's posts
> about can't say this/don't say that/this shouldn't
> be said it makes NR sound
> like a dictatorship>>
>
> Hmm. I suggest you acquaint yourself with the role
> of the Curator Sermo. I
> would also suggest you *read* the emails posted.
> Most notably one entitled
> "ADMIN: List Topics". The fact that you equate one
> or two requests to drop
> a topic, made from folks with no actual authority to
> see that you do so,
> with a dictatorship is..........odd. I'll leave it
> at that.
>
> >>If people can't voice there opinions then again
> this list is futile.>>
>
> Hmm. I would suggest you ponder the fact that no
> one's opinions are being
> censored or stifled. Not even your, shall we say,
> *strident* opinions.
>
> > I can no longer stand the arrogant snobs in this
> organization>>
>
> Oh joy! Insults are just *such* a display of wit
> and they do *so* much to
> foster communication. Sigh.
>
> >>who think they can play god and control what
> people say by telling people
> they should do this or say this.>>
>
> Hmm. Well, since the only two people with the
> specific legal authority to
> tell you whether what you say here is acceptable or
> not are both females,
> the term would be goddess. Then again, *no one* in
> any authority has made
> any such statements so the point is moot.
>
> >>It makes NR seem so unappealing and not worth
> being a part of>>
>
> Oh I quite disagree. Individuals such as yourself
> who engage in
> name-calling and rudeness when you don't like what
> someone else says make
> for an unpleasant environment.
>
> Thankfully, the vast majority of our members do not
> follow your poor
> example.
>
> Vale,
> Priscilla Vedia Serena
> Curatrix Sermonis
> > quintus cornelius caesar
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] Western Attack is War not Terrorism
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:40:31 -0400

Salvete cives et amici,

Citizens who believe the attack on Afghanistan is a terrorist attack are
mistaken. Take a look at the legal definition of terrorism.

Terrorism: An act of terrorism is any specified action, the use of threat of
which is designed to influence any government or to intimidate the public in
order to advanced a political religious or ideological purpose. The
specified actions are actions which:

-involve serious violence against a person
-cause serious damage to property
-endangers a person's life
-create a serious risk of the health or safety of the public or are designed
to interfere with or seriously disrupt an electronic system

Now at first glance you can twist this definition for it fits the United
States and other western countries taking part in the attack on terrorism.
Although unlike Bin Laden's attack ours has been an officially declared war.
Here is a legal definition of war:

War: A contention by force; or the art of paralysing the forces of an enemy.
It is either public or private. Public war is either civil or national.
Civil war is that which is waged between two parties, citizens or members of
the same state or nation. National war is a contest between two or more
independent nations) carried on by authority of their respective
governments. War is not only an act, but a state or condition, for nations
are said to be at war not only when their armies are engaged, so as to be in
the very act of contention, but also when, they have any matter of
controversy or dispute subsisting between them which they are determined to
decide by the use of force, and have declared publicly, or by their acts,
their determination so to decide it. National wars are said to be offensive
or defensive. War is offensive on the part of that government which commits
the first act of violence; it is defensive on the part of that government
which receives such act. If a nation sees itself menaced with an attack, its
first act of violence is to prevent such attack, will be considered as
defensive.

War was *declared* publicly on terrorism. The terrorists know that they are
and will continue to be under attack. US citizens had no idea that they
would be targeted that day in September. Also the war on terrorism was
provoked by terrorists, it is a defensive attack meant to protect western
nations. Terrorism is not done in defence. Terrorism is meant to influence a
group of people by terror and destruction. Thus, the WTC was *TERRORISM*,
the attacks in Afghanistan is a *WAR* against terrorism. Both are violent
and never good. Although one targets innocent people, the other targets
people who kill innocent people.

Valete,


"Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro sum mater ab vitualis"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Provincia Legatus Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Gens Claudia
Canada Orientalis Provincia

Canada Orientalis Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/canorien

Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
--






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	"Teleri ferch Nyfain" <rckovak@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:09:57 -0400

In response to Quintus Cornelius Caesar:

<<Well obviously based on your name (female) you
have a bias from the get-go. >>

Really? Well, may I point out that YOU also seem to have a prejudice - you are male. So naturally the subjugation, imprisonment & demoralization of women must seem less than earth-shattering to you. That is, of course, if I were so narrow-minded as to agree with your above reasoning.

<<You also obviously do not understand the
terminology of cultural relativism.>>

Don't go there. I certainly do understand. Relative to this culture (the US), women are NOT mistreated in the same proportion as they are in Afghanistan. Possibly Japan, Turkey, Morocco & even Saudi Arabia might benefit from this type of comparison ( their attitudes and treatment of women, relative to their culture, is not any more abusive than the US). But the current "culture" in Afghanistan is NOT the native one, nor one of long duration anywhere.
Also, the US does not currently have many institutionalized sexist policies anymore. It boils down, here, to educating the populace to behave better and to keep the very equal & liberal laws we have in place from being overturned. By the way, I work at Social Services. I have access to accurate statistics on child & women abuse, elderly abuse, poverty among women etc. So I know what goes on behind the scenes in my own country very well.

<<They do not have the complex system
established by the nazi's and never will.>>

As I pointed out, I agree with the first half of your statement. The only reason I now agree with the last is the bombing going on over there. Obviously, if we remove the Taliban from power in Afghanistan, and shut down the terrorist schools in Pakistan (or persuade Pakistan to do so), these groups will not be able to complete their agenda. However, that agenda basically was to replace the current governments in the Middle East with strict fundamentalist Muslim regimes like the Taliban. The only serious roadblock while the UN & the US stayed out of it was the dispute between the Sunni & Shiite groups. Several seasoned commanders with whom I served in the Navy said that the worst thing you could do was underestimate and belittle your opponent.

Valete,
Helena Galeria


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Western Attack is War not Terrorism
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 16:05:30 -0700 (PDT)

could you please cite your source on this definition
of terrorism. Because I gave the legal definition
before and yours don't match up. As well terrorism is
a violent act with the intent of creating fear for a
monetary or political motive and its in a public
theatre (do not translate theatre literally) with a
violent act upon people--usually innocent.
quintus cornelius caesar
--- Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@--------> wrote:
>
> Salvete cives et amici,
>
> Citizens who believe the attack on Afghanistan is a
> terrorist attack are
> mistaken. Take a look at the legal definition of
> terrorism.
>
> Terrorism: An act of terrorism is any specified
> action, the use of threat of
> which is designed to influence any government or to
> intimidate the public in
> order to advanced a political religious or
> ideological purpose. The
> specified actions are actions which:
>
> -involve serious violence against a person
> -cause serious damage to property
> -endangers a person's life
> -create a serious risk of the health or safety of
> the public or are designed
> to interfere with or seriously disrupt an
> electronic system
>
> Now at first glance you can twist this definition
> for it fits the United
> States and other western countries taking part in
> the attack on terrorism.
> Although unlike Bin Laden's attack ours has been an
> officially declared war.
> Here is a legal definition of war:
>
> War: A contention by force; or the art of paralysing
> the forces of an enemy.
> It is either public or private. Public war is either
> civil or national.
> Civil war is that which is waged between two
> parties, citizens or members of
> the same state or nation. National war is a contest
> between two or more
> independent nations) carried on by authority of
> their respective
> governments. War is not only an act, but a state or
> condition, for nations
> are said to be at war not only when their armies are
> engaged, so as to be in
> the very act of contention, but also when, they have
> any matter of
> controversy or dispute subsisting between them which
> they are determined to
> decide by the use of force, and have declared
> publicly, or by their acts,
> their determination so to decide it. National wars
> are said to be offensive
> or defensive. War is offensive on the part of that
> government which commits
> the first act of violence; it is defensive on the
> part of that government
> which receives such act. If a nation sees itself
> menaced with an attack, its
> first act of violence is to prevent such attack,
> will be considered as
> defensive.
>
> War was *declared* publicly on terrorism. The
> terrorists know that they are
> and will continue to be under attack. US citizens
> had no idea that they
> would be targeted that day in September. Also the
> war on terrorism was
> provoked by terrorists, it is a defensive attack
> meant to protect western
> nations. Terrorism is not done in defence. Terrorism
> is meant to influence a
> group of people by terror and destruction. Thus, the
> WTC was *TERRORISM*,
> the attacks in Afghanistan is a *WAR* against
> terrorism. Both are violent
> and never good. Although one targets innocent
> people, the other targets
> people who kill innocent people.
>
> Valete,
>
>
> "Quamquam cupido sis delictum ab sui crebro sum
> mater ab vitualis"
> "Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is
> often the mother of virtues"
>
> --
> Amulius Claudius Petrus
> Provincia Legatus Canada Orientalis
> Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
> Retarius Officium Gens Claudia
> Canada Orientalis Provincia
>
> Canada Orientalis Website:
> www.freehost.nu/members/canorien
>
> Gens Claudia Website:
> www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
> --
>
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] war is there accept it
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Oct 2001 16:46:50 -0700 (PDT)

Ave,
Well I may very well have a prejudice. We all do
to a certain extent. I'm sorry if that offended you.
Maybe I shouldn't have made that remark. But maybe I
should have because it did provide me with a response
that is more understandable and rational--from MY
point of view. Secondly as far as cultural relativism
goes I agree partially with what you say. However to
I view everything as being in proportion no matter
what the extreme. Our oppression and suppression of
peoples in the United States has been to certain
levels just as bad as that of the Taliban's culture.
Now I am not arguing for there treatment of women no
matter what bias I may have as a male. Secondly I
hope you are aware that the facts/figures you receive
as an agent of the social services are not accurate.
Well they are and aren't. Just like our crime rate
and the FBI's UCR are not accurate. The UCR just
looks at crimes known to the police. So in reference
to your position in relation to what I just said...how
many women to report abuse? how many don't report or
file discrimination? what about the children? They
are really powerless as children since they are not
considered adults. Nothing they say is really
seriously taken. So the facts you have are not fully
accurate. However my point of view is coming from
both a political science and criminal justice stand
point. You must understand we're coming from two
completely different standpoints. Yours being more
sociological though that is partly involved in CJ.
That's all I will say on the matter without digging
myself a deeper grave...
quintus cornelius caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com