<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 1/25/2003 10:01:08 AM Pacific Standard Time, dhenwood@panix.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Subj:<B>Re: Badly drafted law? Was Re: Raimondo on Ritter </B><BR>
Date:1/25/2003 10:01:08 AM Pacific Standard Time<BR>
From:<A HREF="mailto:dhenwood@panix.com">dhenwood@panix.com</A><BR>
Reply-to:<A HREF="mailto:lbo-talk@lists.panix.com">lbo-talk@lists.panix.com</A><BR>
To:<A HREF="mailto:lbo-talk@lists.panix.com">lbo-talk@lists.panix.com</A><BR>
<I>Sent from the Internet </I><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
DoreneFC@aol.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>(As a side note, I think the weapons inspector who is into SM is just<BR>
>sublime: The whole inspection exercise is a HUGE exercise in dominance and<BR>
>submission if you ask me.)<BR>
<BR>
Nonconsensual, though.<BR>
<BR>
Doug<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
You think? Iraq is still a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty. Whether that is a scene I would want to play in, how free Iraq feels not to play, whether other players are playing safe are different problems, but I am all for trying any metaphor that some way or another suggests ways out of the current mess. Not sure the SM analogy does that, but I am still thinking about that angle.<BR>
<BR>
DoreneC</FONT></HTML>