internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: Butch Lazorchak <contactus AT squealermusic.com>
- To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Re: Draft Hoax [O.T.]
- Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 14:02:53 -0400
Those bills were introduced by Democrats prior to the commencement of official hostilities to "bring the war home" to the Republicans. It was a reminder that if a draft were re-instituted, all those Republican children, comfortably insulated from dirty things like having to actual fight a war, could get sent to the desert and join all the other folks who didn't have the same options they had. If it was your kid (rather than those "other" people's) who was going to get sent to die for pointless adventurism, perhaps you'd think about things a little differently.
Butch
Lance A. Brown wrote:
Jeremy Portzer wrote:
On Fri, 2004-04-23 at 11:46, zman wrote:
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Tony Spencer wrote:
This draft hoax is nothing more than a hoax. My step-brother just finished
basic training this month. Only 40 were selected out of 100 *volunteers*.
Doesn't seem like the military is having any trouble recruiting.
Sorry to piss in your cornflakes, but it is not a hoax. There are bills in both the house and senate to reinstate the draft. I don't consider that a hoax. But of course if you have some other kind of dictionary you use...
Um, there haven't been any bills introduced. That can be verified.
Not sure this qualifies as "a return of the draft" but it sounds similar. H.R.163 and S.89 are both the "Universal National Service Act of 2003". They were introduced to their respective houses on January 7th 2003. Quoting the opening statement of each:
To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.
Thomas links are:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:2:./temp/~c108ZLSNlZ::
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:3:./temp/~c108ZLSNlZ::
I'm not very clueful at reading the status of bills in Thomas, so I'm not sure where these stand.
--[Lance]
--
Butch Lazorchak
Masters candidate, School of Information and Library Science
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
ibiblio LabRat (http://www.ibiblio.org)
Society of American Archivists (SAA)
American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST)
President, Squealer Music (www.SquealerMusic.com)
http://www.butchlazorchak.org
-
Re: [internetworkers] Just for fun
, (continued)
- Re: [internetworkers] Just for fun, zman, 04/23/2004
- [internetworkers] Re: Just for fun, Lance A. Brown, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: Just for fun, zman, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: Just for fun, Tanner Lovelace, 04/23/2004
- [internetworkers] Re: Just for fun, Lance A. Brown, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: Just for fun, matusiak, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: Just for fun, Michael Czeiszperger, 04/23/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Draft Hoax, Jeremy Portzer, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Draft Hoax, Steven Champeon, 04/23/2004
- [internetworkers] Re: Draft Hoax, Lance A. Brown, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: Draft Hoax [O.T.], Butch Lazorchak, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Just for fun, Ron Thigpen, 04/23/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Just for fun, Tom Caswell, 04/23/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Just for fun, Tony Spencer, 04/23/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Just for fun, Tony Spencer, 04/23/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Just for fun, zman, 04/23/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Just for fun, K. Jo Garner, 04/23/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.