Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Rules of War

Expand Messages
  • josepharose@yahoo.com
    To all: A previous contributor to this site recommended ?The Avalon Project at the Yale Law School? located at http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm as
    Message 1 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      To all:

      A previous contributor to this site recommended ?The Avalon Project at
      the Yale Law School? located at
      http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm
      as a good resource. It certainly appears to be that. Under the
      various Rules of War, I found the following instructions put out by
      the Union duringthe Civil War.

      Of particular interest to those reviewing Sherman?s action on his
      march to the sea, I have copied excerpts dealing with the destruction
      of private property. As these seem to be somewhat self-contradictory,
      they could be a good subject for discussion.

      Joseph


      INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ARMIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE
      FIELD

      Prepared by Francis Lieber, promulgated as General Orders No. 100 by
      President Lincoln, 24 April 1863.

      Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the
      Field, prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D., Originally Issued as General
      Orders No. 100, Adjutant General's Office, 1863, Washington 1898:
      Government Printing Office.

      Art. 14.

      Military necessity, as understood by modern civilized nations,
      consists in the necessity of those measures which are indispensable
      for securing the ends of the war, and which are lawful according to
      the modern law and usages of war.

      Art. 15.

      Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of
      armed enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally
      unavoidable in the armed contests of the war; it allows of the
      capturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to the
      hostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows of
      all destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels
      of traffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of
      sustenance or means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of
      whatever an enemy's country affords necessary for the subsistence and
      safety of the army, and of such deception as does not involve the
      breaking of good faith either positively pledged, regarding agreements
      entered into during the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to
      exist. Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not
      cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another
      and to God.

      Art. 16.

      Military necessity does not admit of cruelty - that is, the infliction
      of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming
      or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions. It
      does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton
      devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts
      of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any
      act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult.

      Art. 17.

      War is not carried on by arms alone. It is lawful to starve the
      hostile belligerent, armed or unarmed, so that it leads to the
      speedier subjection of the enemy.

      Art. 44.

      All wanton violence committed against persons in the invaded country,
      all destruction of property not commanded by the authorized officer,
      all robbery, all pillage or sacking, even after taking a place by main
      force, all rape, wounding, maiming, or killing of such inhabitants,
      are prohibited under the penalty of death, or such other severe
      punishment as may seem adequate for the gravity of the offense.

      A soldier, officer or private, in the act of committing such violence,
      and disobeying a superior ordering him to abstain from it, may be
      lawfully killed on the spot by such superior.
    • josepharose@yahoo.com
      To all: A previous contributor to this site recommended ?The Avalon Project at the Yale Law School? located at http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm as
      Message 2 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        To all:

        A previous contributor to this site recommended ?The Avalon Project at
        the Yale Law School? located at
        http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm
        as a good resource. It certainly appears to be that. Under the
        various Rules of War, I found the following instructions put out by
        the Union duringthe Civil War.

        Of particular interest to those reviewing Sherman?s action on his
        march to the sea, I have copied excerpts dealing with the destruction
        of private property. As these seem to be somewhat self-contradictory,
        they could be a good subject for discussion.

        Joseph


        INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ARMIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE
        FIELD

        Prepared by Francis Lieber, promulgated as General Orders No. 100 by
        President Lincoln, 24 April 1863.

        Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the
        Field, prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D., Originally Issued as General
        Orders No. 100, Adjutant General's Office, 1863, Washington 1898:
        Government Printing Office.

        Art. 14.

        Military necessity, as understood by modern civilized nations,
        consists in the necessity of those measures which are indispensable
        for securing the ends of the war, and which are lawful according to
        the modern law and usages of war.

        Art. 15.

        Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of
        armed enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally
        unavoidable in the armed contests of the war; it allows of the
        capturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to the
        hostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows of
        all destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels
        of traffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of
        sustenance or means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of
        whatever an enemy's country affords necessary for the subsistence and
        safety of the army, and of such deception as does not involve the
        breaking of good faith either positively pledged, regarding agreements
        entered into during the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to
        exist. Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not
        cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another
        and to God.

        Art. 16.

        Military necessity does not admit of cruelty - that is, the infliction
        of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming
        or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions. It
        does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton
        devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts
        of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any
        act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult.

        Art. 17.

        War is not carried on by arms alone. It is lawful to starve the
        hostile belligerent, armed or unarmed, so that it leads to the
        speedier subjection of the enemy.

        Art. 44.

        All wanton violence committed against persons in the invaded country,
        all destruction of property not commanded by the authorized officer,
        all robbery, all pillage or sacking, even after taking a place by main
        force, all rape, wounding, maiming, or killing of such inhabitants,
        are prohibited under the penalty of death, or such other severe
        punishment as may seem adequate for the gravity of the offense.

        A soldier, officer or private, in the act of committing such violence,
        and disobeying a superior ordering him to abstain from it, may be
        lawfully killed on the spot by such superior.
      • Tim Harrison
        Joseph, They are self-contradictory in the same way as the term Rules of War are contradictory. Regards, Tim Harrison http://www.snuffworks.com ... From:
        Message 3 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Joseph,
           
          They are self-contradictory in the same way as the term "Rules of War" are contradictory.
           
          Regards,
          Tim Harrison
          http://www.snuffworks.com
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 5:18 PM
          Subject: [civilwarwest] Rules of War

          To all:

          A previous contributor to this site recommended ?The Avalon Project at
          the Yale Law School? located at
          http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm
          as a good resource.  It certainly appears to be that.  Under the
          various Rules of War, I found the following instructions put out by
          the Union duringthe Civil War.

          Of particular interest to those reviewing Sherman?s action on his
          march to the sea, I have copied excerpts dealing with the destruction
          of private property.  As these seem to be somewhat self-contradictory,
          they could be a good subject for discussion.

          Joseph


          INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ARMIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE
          FIELD

          Prepared by Francis Lieber, promulgated as General Orders No. 100 by
          President Lincoln, 24 April 1863.

          Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the
          Field, prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D., Originally Issued as General
          Orders No. 100, Adjutant General's Office, 1863, Washington 1898:
          Government Printing Office.

          Art. 14.

          Military necessity, as understood by modern civilized nations,
          consists in the necessity of those measures which are indispensable
          for securing the ends of the war, and which are lawful according to
          the modern law and usages of war.

          Art. 15.

          Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of
          armed enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally
          unavoidable in the armed contests of the war; it allows of the
          capturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to the
          hostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows of
          all destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels
          of traffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of
          sustenance or means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of
          whatever an enemy's country affords necessary for the subsistence and
          safety of the army, and of such deception as does not involve the
          breaking of good faith either positively pledged, regarding agreements
          entered into during the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to
          exist. Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not
          cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another
          and to God.

          Art. 16.

          Military necessity does not admit of cruelty - that is, the infliction
          of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming
          or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions. It
          does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton
          devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts
          of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any
          act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult.

          Art. 17.

          War is not carried on by arms alone. It is lawful to starve the
          hostile belligerent, armed or unarmed, so that it leads to the
          speedier subjection of the enemy.

          Art. 44.

          All wanton violence committed against persons in the invaded country,
          all destruction of property not commanded by the authorized officer,
          all robbery, all pillage or sacking, even after taking a place by main
          force, all rape, wounding, maiming, or killing of such inhabitants,
          are prohibited under the penalty of death, or such other severe
          punishment as may seem adequate for the gravity of the offense.

          A soldier, officer or private, in the act of committing such violence,
          and disobeying a superior ordering him to abstain from it, may be
          lawfully killed on the spot by such superior.



        • Tim Harrison
          Joseph, They are self-contradictory in the same way as the term Rules of War are contradictory. Regards, Tim Harrison http://www.snuffworks.com ... From:
          Message 4 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Joseph,
             
            They are self-contradictory in the same way as the term "Rules of War" are contradictory.
             
            Regards,
            Tim Harrison
            http://www.snuffworks.com
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 5:18 PM
            Subject: [civilwarwest] Rules of War

            To all:

            A previous contributor to this site recommended ?The Avalon Project at
            the Yale Law School? located at
            http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm
            as a good resource.  It certainly appears to be that.  Under the
            various Rules of War, I found the following instructions put out by
            the Union duringthe Civil War.

            Of particular interest to those reviewing Sherman?s action on his
            march to the sea, I have copied excerpts dealing with the destruction
            of private property.  As these seem to be somewhat self-contradictory,
            they could be a good subject for discussion.

            Joseph


            INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ARMIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE
            FIELD

            Prepared by Francis Lieber, promulgated as General Orders No. 100 by
            President Lincoln, 24 April 1863.

            Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the
            Field, prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D., Originally Issued as General
            Orders No. 100, Adjutant General's Office, 1863, Washington 1898:
            Government Printing Office.

            Art. 14.

            Military necessity, as understood by modern civilized nations,
            consists in the necessity of those measures which are indispensable
            for securing the ends of the war, and which are lawful according to
            the modern law and usages of war.

            Art. 15.

            Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of
            armed enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally
            unavoidable in the armed contests of the war; it allows of the
            capturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to the
            hostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows of
            all destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels
            of traffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of
            sustenance or means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of
            whatever an enemy's country affords necessary for the subsistence and
            safety of the army, and of such deception as does not involve the
            breaking of good faith either positively pledged, regarding agreements
            entered into during the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to
            exist. Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not
            cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another
            and to God.

            Art. 16.

            Military necessity does not admit of cruelty - that is, the infliction
            of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming
            or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions. It
            does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton
            devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts
            of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any
            act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult.

            Art. 17.

            War is not carried on by arms alone. It is lawful to starve the
            hostile belligerent, armed or unarmed, so that it leads to the
            speedier subjection of the enemy.

            Art. 44.

            All wanton violence committed against persons in the invaded country,
            all destruction of property not commanded by the authorized officer,
            all robbery, all pillage or sacking, even after taking a place by main
            force, all rape, wounding, maiming, or killing of such inhabitants,
            are prohibited under the penalty of death, or such other severe
            punishment as may seem adequate for the gravity of the offense.

            A soldier, officer or private, in the act of committing such violence,
            and disobeying a superior ordering him to abstain from it, may be
            lawfully killed on the spot by such superior.



          • josepharose@yahoo.com
            Tim, I made a mistake in an earlier post. I stated that, on 11/7/63, Grant ordered Thomas to attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge which: would have
            Message 5 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Tim,

              I made a mistake in an earlier post. I stated that, on 11/7/63, Grant
              ordered Thomas to attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge which:

              "would have had the latter?s still-starving army?-without cavalry or
              horses to draw artillery, without holding Lookout Mountain or Orchard
              Knob, with Chattanooga left mainly undefended, with Hooker still in
              Lookout Valley, without Sherman's troops, with Walker's Confederate
              division [I meant Buckner's Division which Bushrod Johnson later took
              to Knoxville] still on the field, and with only one day?s
              notice?-attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge and, after that
              easy feat, attempt to cut the railroads beyond!"

              Sorry about that.

              I just read in a Sherman biography that he was threatening to quit the
              army if the Thanks of Congress was given to Thomas and his army and
              Hooker and his Army, after Chattanooga, while he and the AotT was
              overlooked. He repeated that Hooker's best fighting was performed by
              Osterhaus' Division, which was a unit from the AotT as a reason he
              deserved it. How ironic.

              Cordially,
              Joseph
            • josepharose@yahoo.com
              Tim, I made a mistake in an earlier post. I stated that, on 11/7/63, Grant ordered Thomas to attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge which: would have
              Message 6 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Tim,

                I made a mistake in an earlier post. I stated that, on 11/7/63, Grant
                ordered Thomas to attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge which:

                "would have had the latter?s still-starving army?-without cavalry or
                horses to draw artillery, without holding Lookout Mountain or Orchard
                Knob, with Chattanooga left mainly undefended, with Hooker still in
                Lookout Valley, without Sherman's troops, with Walker's Confederate
                division [I meant Buckner's Division which Bushrod Johnson later took
                to Knoxville] still on the field, and with only one day?s
                notice?-attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge and, after that
                easy feat, attempt to cut the railroads beyond!"

                Sorry about that.

                I just read in a Sherman biography that he was threatening to quit the
                army if the Thanks of Congress was given to Thomas and his army and
                Hooker and his Army, after Chattanooga, while he and the AotT was
                overlooked. He repeated that Hooker's best fighting was performed by
                Osterhaus' Division, which was a unit from the AotT as a reason he
                deserved it. How ironic.

                Cordially,
                Joseph
              • Tim Harrison
                Joseph, I have not dissected the matter, so no harm is done. Thank you for the clarification. Regards, Tim Harrison http://www.snuffworks.com ... From:
                Message 7 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Joseph,
                   
                  I have not dissected the matter, so no harm is done.  Thank you for the clarification.
                   
                  Regards,
                  Tim Harrison
                  http://www.snuffworks.com
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:56 PM
                  Subject: [civilwarwest] Apology

                  Tim,

                  I made a mistake in an earlier post.  I stated that, on 11/7/63, Grant
                  ordered Thomas to attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge which:

                  "would have had the latter?s still-starving army?-without cavalry or
                  horses to draw artillery, without holding Lookout Mountain or Orchard
                  Knob, with Chattanooga left mainly undefended, with Hooker still in
                  Lookout Valley, without Sherman's troops, with Walker's Confederate
                  division [I meant Buckner's Division which Bushrod Johnson later took
                  to Knoxville] still on the field, and with only one day?s
                  notice?-attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge and, after that
                  easy feat, attempt to cut the railroads beyond!"

                  Sorry about that.

                  I just read in a Sherman biography that he was threatening to quit the
                  army if the Thanks of Congress was given to Thomas and his army and
                  Hooker and his Army, after Chattanooga, while he and the AotT was
                  overlooked.  He repeated that Hooker's best fighting was performed by
                  Osterhaus' Division, which was a unit from the AotT as a reason he
                  deserved it.  How ironic.

                  Cordially,
                  Joseph


                • Tim Harrison
                  Joseph, I have not dissected the matter, so no harm is done. Thank you for the clarification. Regards, Tim Harrison http://www.snuffworks.com ... From:
                  Message 8 of 14 , Feb 7, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Joseph,
                     
                    I have not dissected the matter, so no harm is done.  Thank you for the clarification.
                     
                    Regards,
                    Tim Harrison
                    http://www.snuffworks.com
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:56 PM
                    Subject: [civilwarwest] Apology

                    Tim,

                    I made a mistake in an earlier post.  I stated that, on 11/7/63, Grant
                    ordered Thomas to attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge which:

                    "would have had the latter?s still-starving army?-without cavalry or
                    horses to draw artillery, without holding Lookout Mountain or Orchard
                    Knob, with Chattanooga left mainly undefended, with Hooker still in
                    Lookout Valley, without Sherman's troops, with Walker's Confederate
                    division [I meant Buckner's Division which Bushrod Johnson later took
                    to Knoxville] still on the field, and with only one day?s
                    notice?-attack the northern end of Missionary Ridge and, after that
                    easy feat, attempt to cut the railroads beyond!"

                    Sorry about that.

                    I just read in a Sherman biography that he was threatening to quit the
                    army if the Thanks of Congress was given to Thomas and his army and
                    Hooker and his Army, after Chattanooga, while he and the AotT was
                    overlooked.  He repeated that Hooker's best fighting was performed by
                    Osterhaus' Division, which was a unit from the AotT as a reason he
                    deserved it.  How ironic.

                    Cordially,
                    Joseph


                  • Aurelie1999@aol.com
                    In a message dated 9/10/02 4:49:01 PM, jaaah@tbcnet.com writes: Don t
                    Message 9 of 14 , Sep 10, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In a message dated 9/10/02 4:49:01 PM, jaaah@... writes:

                      << I received the original warning from a trusted source and consequently
                      fell for it. >>

                      Don't feel too bad Addison, I did as well two years ago. Similar hoax. Take
                      care and don't worry about it. Having just lost my computer to an evil
                      critter, 4 weeks ago, I can assure you this ain't cancer and isn't the WTC.
                      Just an inconvenience.

                      Connie Boone
                    • jaaah@tbcnet.com
                      I sent a warning to you which turns out is a hoax. Below is more information. I received the original warning from a trusted source and consequently fell for
                      Message 10 of 14 , Sep 10, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I sent a warning to you which turns out is a hoax. Below is more information. I received the original warning from a trusted source and consequently fell for it. My apologies.

                        FrAH


                        SUMMARY
                        There is a virus hoax that advises customers to delete a valid Windows file that is named Jdbgmgr.exe. This file is the Microsoft Debugger Registrar for Java. If you receive the e-mail message that is listed in the "More Information" section of this article, delete the e-mail message and do not forward it to others. Although this file may become infected with a virus, its presence is not an indication of a virus infection.
                        MORE INFORMATION
                        Contents of the Hoax Message
                        The Jdbgmgr.exe virus hoax arrives in an e-mail message with the following body text:
                        I found the little bear in my machine because of that I am sending this message in order for you to find it in your machine. The procedure is very simple:

                        The objective of this e-mail is to warn all Hotmail users about a new virus that is spreading by MSN Messenger. The name of this virus is jdbgmgr.exe and it is sent automatically by the Messenger and by the address book too. The virus is not detected by McAfee or Norton and it stays quiet for 14 days before damaging the system.

                        The virus can be cleaned before it deletes the files from your system. In order to eliminate it, it is just necessary to do the following steps:
                        1. Go to Start, click "Search"
                        2.- In the "Files or Folders option" write the name jdbgmgr.exe
                        3.- Be sure that you are searching in the drive "C"
                        4.- Click "find now"
                        5.- If the virus is there (it has a little bear-like icon with the name of jdbgmgr.exe DO NOT OPEN IT FOR ANY REASON
                        6.- Right click and delete it (it will go to the Recycle bin)
                        7.- Go to the recycle bin and delete it or empty the recycle bin.

                        IF YOU FIND THE VIRUS IN ALL OF YOUR SYSTEMS SEND THIS MESSAGE TO ALL OF YOUR CONTACTS LOCATED IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK BEFORE IT CAN CAUSE ANY DAMAGE.
                        Prevention
                        This is a hoax; no prevention is required.
                        Recovery
                        The Microsoft Debugger Registrar for Java (Jdbgmgr.exe) is only used by Microsoft Visual J++ 1.1 developers.

                        If you follow the e-mail message instructions and delete this file, you do not have to recover it unless you use Microsoft Visual J++ 1.1 to develop Java programs on Windows XP, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows 98, or Windows 95.

                        For Windows XP, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows 98, and Windows 95:

                        Reinstall Microsoft Virtual Machine (Microsoft VM).

                        The Microsoft VM is not available as a Web download. For information on the availability of the Microsoft VM in Windows XP, see the following Microsoft Web site:
                        http://www.microsoft.com/java/xp.htm
                        Windows 2000:

                        The Windows 2000 File Protection feature will recover the file. For additional information about the Windows 2000 File Protection feature, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
                        Q222193 Description of the Windows 2000 Windows File Protection Feature
                        Windows Millennium Edition (Me): The Windows Me System File Protection feature will recover the file. For additional information about the Windows Me File Protection feature, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
                        Q253571 Description of the System File Protection Feature
                        REFERENCESRelated Security Information
                        For additional information about viruses, visit the following third-party Web sites:
                        http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/jdbgmgr.exe.file.hoax.html

                        http://vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_99436.htm
                        Microsoft provides third-party contact information to help you find technical support. This contact information may change without notice. Microsoft does not guarantee the accuracy of this third-party contact information.

                        For additional security-related information about Microsoft products, visit the following Microsoft Web site:
                        http://www.microsoft.com/security/default.asp
                        First Published: May 14 2002 8:00AM
                        Keywords: kbvirus kbSECAntiVirus kbinfo winme win98 win98se wfp sfp




                        Send Help
                        Last reviewed Monday, September 09, 2002

                        � 2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of use Privacy statement Accessibility



                        Download NeoPlanet at http://www.neoplanet.com
                      • Donnie Nodine
                        I apologize to all about my post about government. I sent that to this group by mistake. I will make sure that I do not do that again. I did not mean to upset
                        Message 11 of 14 , Jul 26, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I apologize to all about my post about government. I sent that to this group by mistake. I will make sure that I do not do that again. I did not mean to upset anyone. 
                           
                           
                           
                          Donnie
                          Portland, TN
                        • Steven Lee
                                           It s alright Donnie.... Mistakes happen... I m sure you ve heard to err is human ...     Besides, this group needed some
                          Message 12 of 14 , Aug 1, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                                             It's alright Donnie.... Mistakes happen... I'm sure you've heard "to err is human"...     Besides, this group needed some sort of excitement....   It used to be so very imformative....  Now, literally quite boring!    I wonder who scared everybody off????

                            --- On Sat, 7/26/08, Donnie Nodine <Nodinedr@...> wrote:
                            From: Donnie Nodine <Nodinedr@...>
                            Subject: [civilwarwest] Apology
                            To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                            Date: Saturday, July 26, 2008, 3:37 PM

                            I apologize to all about my post about government. I sent that to this group by mistake. I will make sure that I do not do that again. I did not mean to upset anyone. 
                             
                             
                             
                            Donnie
                            Portland, TN

                          • Donnie Nodine
                            I don t know but I noticed that no one talks on this site much Deo Vindice! Donnie Nodine Portland, Tennessee ... From: Steven Lee Date: 8/1/2008 5:30:56 PM
                            Message 13 of 14 , Aug 2, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I don't know but I noticed that no one talks on this site much 
                               
                              Deo Vindice!
                              Donnie Nodine
                              Portland, Tennessee
                              -------Original Message-------
                               
                              Date: 8/1/2008 5:30:56 PM
                              Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Apology
                               

                                               It's alright Donnie.... Mistakes happen... I'm sure you've heard "to err is human"...     Besides, this group needed some sort of excitement.. ..   It used to be so very imformative. ...  Now, literally quite boring!    I wonder who scared everybody off????

                              --- On Sat, 7/26/08, Donnie Nodine <Nodinedr@comcast. net> wrote:
                              From: Donnie Nodine <Nodinedr@comcast. net>
                              Subject: [civilwarwest] Apology
                              To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
                              Date: Saturday, July 26, 2008, 3:37 PM

                              I apologize to all about my post about government. I sent that to this group by mistake. I will make sure that I do not do that again. I did not mean to upset anyone. 
                               
                               
                               
                              Donnie
                              Portland, TN

                               
                            • NPeters102@aol.com
                              In a message dated 08/02/2008 10:42:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Nodinedr@comcast.net writes: I don t know but I noticed that no one talks on this site much
                              Message 14 of 14 , Aug 2, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                In a message dated 08/02/2008 10:42:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Nodinedr@... writes:
                                I don't know but I noticed that no one talks on this site much 
                                Start a thread. And see what happens ....
                                 
                                Respectfully,

                                Mike Peters
                                npeters102@...




                                Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.