LOL
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Scott wrote:
> I agree. 8 years of Bush made a large porion of our popultion so stupid,
> they feel Obama is our Savior.
~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramat
I agree. 8 years of Bush made a large porion of our popultion so stupid,
they feel Obama is our Savior.
>
>
> 8 years of Bush has really either revealed or turned a large portion
> of our population into fucking idiots.
>
> So I'm not sure, I guess. Were these people idiots first,
> susceptible
Which part?
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Dana wrote:
> Really. Do you honestly think that is true or are you hiding behind
> some sort of sophistry like he *personally* has not done that? Or not
> exactly that?
~|
Adobe® Col
Really. Do you honestly think that is true or are you hiding behind
some sort of sophistry like he *personally* has not done that? Or not
exactly that?
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First, slavery is an entirely separate issue. What we are talking about
That may be true. But Jose Padilla was supposedly plotting to detonate
a dirty bomb, and that charge turned out to be based on no evidence.
If what you say is true then what is the problem with trying him on
criminal charges? If he gets a fair trial and is found guilty then he
can be placed in the
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Gruss wrote:
> >
>
>
> 8 years of Bush has really either revealed or turned a large portion
> of our population into fucking idiots.
>
> So I'm not sure, I guess. Were these people idiots first,
> susceptible to becoming idiots?
>
> What do you think?
>
I think
First, slavery is an entirely separate issue. What we are talking about here
is whether the President can, when there is an existential threat to the
nation, limit individual rights including habeus corpus in the interest of
protecting the country. Bush has never employed this power, for instance,
> I don't agree with the bailouts either, but I am slightly more
> outraged over the concept that it is ok to assert that someone is a
> terrorist and lock him up for years on end. That could be me; it could
> be you. Once you say it is ok to do that you are relying on government
> officials to hav
I don't agree with the bailouts either, but I am slightly more
outraged over the concept that it is ok to assert that someone is a
terrorist and lock him up for years on end. That could be me; it could
be you. Once you say it is ok to do that you are relying on government
officials to have a sense
> point is... do you think this should be happening? It might have been
> upheld in the past but Ronald Reagan subsequently apologized for it on
> behaldf of the US. *SLAVERY* was upheld in the past!
Point is, it doesn't make two bits difference what I think (though for
the record I think both sl
point is... do you think this should be happening? It might have been
upheld in the past but Ronald Reagan subsequently apologized for it on
behaldf of the US. *SLAVERY* was upheld in the past!
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:21 PM, C. Hatton Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Abe Lincoln did the
Yes, and that was a massive human rights violation which the US apologised for.
That doesn't quite help the case that you're trying to make.
2008/12/6 C. Hatton Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment
>This power was used to declare that all peop
>> Abe Lincoln did the same thing.
>
> Dude. That shit was over a hundred years ago and I sure as hell don't
> give a fuck.
Okay, something more recent then -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment
President Franklin Roosevelt authorized the internment with Executive
Order 90
> RoMunn wrote:
> Abe Lincoln did the same thing.
Dude. That shit was over a hundred years ago and I sure as hell don't
give a fuck.
'
What I do give fuck about - and you should too - is if the government
can hold me indefinitely without trial or process and the President
you voted for twice says
Abe Lincoln did the same thing. According to your logic, Abe Lincoln hated
America, and you hate Abe Lincoln.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Gruss wrote:
> Here's one of a many reasons why:
>
> "But in the most recent decision, the US Court of Appeals for the 4th
> Circuit ruled 5-4 that the pre
Here's one of a many reasons why:
"But in the most recent decision, the US Court of Appeals for the 4th
Circuit ruled 5-4 that the president can detain people in the US,
including American citizens, indefinitely without charge."
What the feck??
--
More on how the Bush administration attempted to
16 matches
Mail list logo
