try doing it on a week night when you have to be at work by 10:00am the next morning and you didn't start coming down until 7:00. oh what fun. but hey, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
i was beat, but it wasn't as bad as thinking you were going to get off early to go see the fireworks show downtown on the 4th, so you decide to take a hit and 1/2 to catch up to your buddies that are waiting for you at the bar. big mistake, manager forgot that i was there as a favor to another manager, and didn't cut me for a good hour or more later. imagine trying to wait tables looking at seafood that's looking back at you while your tripping acid. all those little crawfish dancing on my tray singing their magical little song. i'm suprised i made it through that without some serious deep rooted issues. turned out to be a fun night though, but damn that was some uncomfortable shit.
try doing it on a week night when you have to be at work by 10:00am the next morning and you didn't start coming down until 7:00. oh what fun. but hey, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
try dropping 'four way window pane' for your first acid trip while still in highschool and at a party at 2 am while you drank so much that you puke just as its starting to peak . . . .4 way is the strongest
my sister tells me I was running around the house naked . ..
ahhh . . . but live dangerously . . . and regret nothing . . . if you can
Blaring music at them is not torture. Sleep deprivation, maybe. But blaring music at them is not torture. I don't care about the UN charter. Just because the 'UN says so' doesn't mean that it is right. The UN is not some infallible body that is never wrong.
I guess this troture is kinda like working a 16-hour day and then dropping acid at 1 a.m.---on a weekend mind you---and then getting Kate Bush's Wuthering Heights stuck in
[snip: Thai mushrooms kicking in]
Barney once he hits Iraqi syndication.
Ena, but this is astonishing. You and askolodotna have so much in common! He took pots of acid and became a religious fundamentalist too! Shame he got banned. You'd have liked him.
Ena, but this is astonishing. You and askolodotna have so much in common! He took pots of acid and became a religious fundamentalist too! Shame he got banned. You'd have liked him.
Acid induces religion? No wonder priests don't think twice before molesting children. ;-)
Ena, but this is astonishing. You and askolodotna have so much in common! He took pots of acid and became a religious fundamentalist too! Shame he got banned. You'd have liked him.
....just don't forget to check under your bed for the five other indentities that Brussel came up with---it's not easy being a figment of so many imaginations.
With relevancy to torture, it is the United Nations Convention Against Torture which is law, not the UN Charter.
You're telling that to the wrong poster.
I'm addressing the one stating that ?The UN Charter is US law? with matter relevant to that thread.
Quote:
Quote:
And then of course there is the difference between law of the land and international law, which was addressed in previous threads.
And evidently some people still don't understand what 'supreme law of the land' means.
I assume that, given the ways of scripturally literalist parochial reverence of quasi-sacrosanct old texts, common in your provinces, you are thinking about this:
Quote:
«Article VI:
(?)
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
(?)»
The supreme law of any land is relevant to the citizens of that land, who, not enjoying the status of sovereign entities, must abide by it or face forcible enforcement.
International law is constituted of signed agreements binding states which agree to sign it, as states are sovereign entities and don't bow down to the authority of some ?super-state?.
So a sovereign country signatory to a treaty pertaining to the legality or illegality of such and such practice, is thus required to have in its own law of the land, specific acts, bills, or articles, which specifically address said practice, rather than simply referring to a treaty or convention.
That is one example of the essential difference between ?law of the land? and ?international law?, which was covered more extensively in other threads.
I know, that's why I said you're addressing the wrong poster. It's the 'other guy' that's claiming he doesn't care if anti-torture = UN Charter.
And then you could finish what the poster actually said, which was "I don't care about the UN charter. Just because the 'UN says so' doesn't mean that it is right. The UN is not some infallible body that is never wrong."
Which is to say, the UN saying it is wrong, doesn't make it wrong.
But, the UN doesn't really say it is wrong, not explicitly anyway. Open to interpretation and you'd have to use a pretty loose interpretation to imply this is a case of actual torture, even by the UN's definition.
Comments
Originally posted by running with scissors
try doing it on a week night when you have to be at work by 10:00am the next morning and you didn't start coming down until 7:00. oh what fun. but hey, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
aye yi yi!
I'll bet that was a tough row to hoe!
Originally posted by ena
aye yi yi!
I'll bet that was a tough row to hoe!
i was beat, but it wasn't as bad as thinking you were going to get off early to go see the fireworks show downtown on the 4th, so you decide to take a hit and 1/2 to catch up to your buddies that are waiting for you at the bar. big mistake, manager forgot that i was there as a favor to another manager, and didn't cut me for a good hour or more later. imagine trying to wait tables looking at seafood that's looking back at you while your tripping acid. all those little crawfish dancing on my tray singing their magical little song. i'm suprised i made it through that without some serious deep rooted issues. turned out to be a fun night though, but damn that was some uncomfortable shit.
Originally posted by running with scissors
try doing it on a week night when you have to be at work by 10:00am the next morning and you didn't start coming down until 7:00. oh what fun. but hey, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
try dropping 'four way window pane' for your first acid trip while still in highschool and at a party at 2 am while you drank so much that you puke just as its starting to peak . . . .4 way is the strongest
my sister tells me I was running around the house naked . ..
ahhh . . . but live dangerously . . . and regret nothing . . . if you can
I admit nothing Nothing NOTHING!
WILL THEY STOP AT NOTHING?!!
Originally posted by ena
I guess this troture is kinda like working a 16-hour day and then dropping acid at 1 a.m.---on a weekend mind you---and then getting Kate Bush's Wuthering Heights stuck in
[snip: Thai mushrooms kicking in]
Barney once he hits Iraqi syndication.
Ena, but this is astonishing. You and askolodotna have so much in common! He took pots of acid and became a religious fundamentalist too! Shame he got banned. You'd have liked him.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Ena, but this is astonishing. You and askolodotna have so much in common! He took pots of acid and became a religious fundamentalist too! Shame he got banned. You'd have liked him.
Acid induces religion? No wonder priests don't think twice before molesting children. ;-)
Originally posted by al Dajjal
Ena, but this is astonishing. You and askolodotna have so much in common! He took pots of acid and became a religious fundamentalist too! Shame he got banned. You'd have liked him.
....just don't forget to check under your bed for the five other indentities that Brussel came up with---it's not easy being a figment of so many imaginations.
Originally posted by pyr3
I don't care about the UN charter.
Then your opinion is irrelevant. The UN Charter is US law.
Originally posted by bunge
Then your opinion is irrelevant. The UN Charter is US law.
With relevancy to torture, it is the United Nations Convention Against Torture which is law, not the UN Charter.
And then of course there is the difference between law of the land and international law, which was addressed in previous threads.
Originally posted by bunge
Then your opinion is irrelevant. The UN Charter is US law.
I thought that the UN Charter was 'international law'.
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
With relevancy to torture, it is the United Nations Convention Against Torture which is law, not the UN Charter.
You're telling that to the wrong poster.
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
And then of course there is the difference between law of the land and international law, which was addressed in previous threads.
And evidently some people still don't understand what 'supreme law of the land' means.
Originally posted by mrmister
I'm so glad we switched the discussion to acid, because for a while it seemed as if Anders was serious.
acid is fun and interesting, anders is not.
Originally posted by bunge
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
With relevancy to torture, it is the United Nations Convention Against Torture which is law, not the UN Charter.
You're telling that to the wrong poster.
I'm addressing the one stating that ?The UN Charter is US law? with matter relevant to that thread.
And then of course there is the difference between law of the land and international law, which was addressed in previous threads.
And evidently some people still don't understand what 'supreme law of the land' means.
I assume that, given the ways of scripturally literalist parochial reverence of quasi-sacrosanct old texts, common in your provinces, you are thinking about this:
«Article VI:
(?)
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
(?)»
The supreme law of any land is relevant to the citizens of that land, who, not enjoying the status of sovereign entities, must abide by it or face forcible enforcement.
International law is constituted of signed agreements binding states which agree to sign it, as states are sovereign entities and don't bow down to the authority of some ?super-state?.
So a sovereign country signatory to a treaty pertaining to the legality or illegality of such and such practice, is thus required to have in its own law of the land, specific acts, bills, or articles, which specifically address said practice, rather than simply referring to a treaty or convention.
That is one example of the essential difference between ?law of the land? and ?international law?, which was covered more extensively in other threads.
Originally posted by running with scissors
acid is fun and interesting, anders is not.
Well its good to have good and healthy interests
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
I'm addressing the one...
I know, that's why I said you're addressing the wrong poster. It's the 'other guy' that's claiming he doesn't care if anti-torture = UN Charter.
Originally posted by bunge
I know, that's why I said you're addressing the wrong poster. It's the 'other guy' that's claiming he doesn't care if anti-torture = UN Charter.
And then you could finish what the poster actually said, which was "I don't care about the UN charter. Just because the 'UN says so' doesn't mean that it is right. The UN is not some infallible body that is never wrong."
Which is to say, the UN saying it is wrong, doesn't make it wrong.
But, the UN doesn't really say it is wrong, not explicitly anyway. Open to interpretation and you'd have to use a pretty loose interpretation to imply this is a case of actual torture, even by the UN's definition.