you seem to miss the point
These "spys" are not spying on thje govt, they are informing on terrorist working to dedstabilize the govt and who are killing anyone who disagrees with them.
36 posts • joined 13 Jun 2007
Anyone else predict a massive upswing in attendance at girls volleyball games? A serious question is, what happens when you 16 or 14 year old daughter decides to go topless. Any guy over 17 who sees her has pretty much commited a crime with the way the law is currently written. Not to mention, do you honestly want your teen daughter walking around in public topless?
this is more akin to going into somebodys house, and going through their medical files, then claiming its ok because you were just curious and the upstairs window wasnt locked. if he had just stumbled across the info, thats one thing, but he went deliberatly looking for classified data on Goverment systems, including ones dealing dealing security and defense. The difficutly he had in getting in to the system is irrelevent. the fact he told a user he was in the system, and what if any damage he did, is to be dertermined by the courts and will affect sentencing, but does not mean he does not get charged.
regarding the 14th amendment, as i recall the courts ruled that the govt has a fundemental right to search inbound items...and while its nice to yell about search warrents, how would you like to be held as a "guest of the govt" in a small room in the airport over the weekend waiting for a judge to be found to issue the order? DHS would rather deny you entry than let ppl in unsearched. and the court ruled that it was inpraticle to get search warrents for this, due to the time sensative nature of airports.
as for native americans, what we call the native americans wernt the first group, at least 2, and some argue as many as 4, mass migrations happened in prehistoric time, and each group tended to wipe out the ones already here.
not getting involved in the name calling just wish to point out that while you are deciding who is more evil, Bush has yet to be charged with anything, and has....plausable deniablity for a lot of things he is accused of. it also should be pointed out that clinton wasnt on trial for having sex. he was on trial because a fired whitehouse intern said she was fired for REFUSING to have sex with clinton, in his defense clinton stated under oath he did not have sex with her or ANY other intern, and everyone though bitter employee trying to make a quick buck. then said intern recorded a phone call with monica lowenski talking about her sexcapades with clinton...and the legal frenzy ensued. so at this point in time, all we know is bush is play fast and loose with the law, but has yet to be confirmed he himself has broken any, as opposed to clinton who fired an intern for not sleeping with him then lied about it under oath. in all fairness i think he was aquitted of the sex discrimination charge for firing the intern.
the fact she was in her house means nothing. most places dont allow swearing in public, though it isnt stringently enforced, even though she was "in" her house, if she was swearing loudly enough to be heard by her neighbor, she looses the in my house argument. it would be helpful to know what time it was, if it was 12 noon, a simple asking her to tone it down should have been all, if it was midnight, i would have called the police to.
i think the thing most ppl are hung up on the swearing, witch is only part of the problem. the main thing was, one of her neighbors could hear her. i dont remember if it said what time this happened, but most location do have noise ordinaces, meaning if i blast my stereo for my neighbors to hear at 3 am. they cops will show up. the fact she swearing onlymeans she was pissed off and likly sweared at the cops...something guarenteed not to help your situation.
there is bias in the media and it does slantleft... but it is a hugh conglomerate. the top layer with a few exceptions is BIG bussiness mostly republican, they set over all policy, and tend to be happy as long as they make money, once you go lower, the producers and editors who actully make day to day decisions on what story to run and how to run it thats where you hit the most liberal bias is, the joranlist themselves i think mostly just try to get attention getting stories, true ot not, no matter the bias, again there are many exception, but that tends to be the way it trends. and the media has been sharply critical of bush for many years, its just they are carefull, do to his strong republican support, meaning advertisers and money, and the fact if you snub bush, he snubs you, meaning you loose your white house press pass, so it was monetary more that right wing agenda that kept the stories...less critical, clinton was raked over the coles because sex sells, and sex, lies, cover up and politics sell REALLY REALLY well.
arent easier to use and more layers of oversite mutually exclusive?
and just a thought, for all of you who are claiming its 1984 and this will just be used against us in the future, you do relize the same could be said of a lot of things, the military, the police, taxes, medicare even??? i think some will even argue that some of these are already being used aginst them... that dosent mean they arent needed or usefull. not saying this is a good idea, but the mere fact it "can be used against you" does not automaticly make it a bad idea.
while i agree that chlorine is not considered militarily combat effective, but neither are suicide bombers. the problem is you are not dealing with a military. a simple 55 gallon barrel of chlorine can empty a very large building it its just spilled inside of it, no explosives needed. and while it likly wont kill anyone itself, it can make u VERY sick, it will also force you outside, possiably into an ambush? while i agree banning is a bit extreme and there are other substances than can have the same affect, but chlorine is cheaper and easier, i mean hydrogen and helium and oxygen are just as dangerous, but are more expensive, harder to transport, and not usualy stored in large quanities like chlorine. honestly, have you ever seen a tank truck hauling a few thousand gallons of hydrogen?
i cant find myself getting mad at these ppl. i dont like their tatics, but they strike me as a mercenary hired to do a dirty and impossiable job. and im sure they are charging the RIAA an ungoldy sum compared to what they actully get acomplished...i can see them going overboard just to show some results.
maybe they can add a handcrank, a few cranks gives you a shot, "zap zap crank"
seriously, i think these are more aimed at things that carry thier own power supply, like tanks and humvees and aircraft carriers. i suppose they could go ghostbuster on us and strap an un-liscensed particle accelerator on their backs... but hand weapons i think are out untill there is a major battery breakthrough.
evolutions main problem is its barely scientific, even in its purest form, and that was hijacked long ago. ppl confuse evolution with abiogenisis(sp?), dont understand the terms they use, and in some cases the definition of the word depends on how you are using it. another big thing that no one mentions, the definition of species, is not scientific really any more, and is determined by voting, and the ppl involved have no real obligation to "fullly" look into what they are voting on. aslo, for most of the history of biology, it has been judged by how things look and act, things that are VERY superficial. we have just now starting doing the genetic footwork to start calssifiying by the genes they have. and another point. how do we define ourselves. some humans possess the gene for 6 fingers and toes. if a group decided to only breed with others, at what point do they stop being human? is humantiy(or any species) defined by a certain number of genes in common? or are we more than a naturely selected code of random mutations?
that america Stole texas through the mexican was is a lie mexicans tell to ease their ego. mexico has always had social issues, revolutions and such, in the early 1800s several provinces, i beleive 3 in the north(including texas), and 1 in the south rebelled under general santa anna's govt. as i recall the texas forces captured him near san jacinto, and in return for his life he gave texas its freedom. once he was released, and safely back in mexico city he decalred the treaty that he signed null and void...but did not march back into texas. during the next few years, texas became a nation, complete with embassy and was a fully independent republic, even though mexico always claimed otherwise. then in 1845 texas requested admission into the union and was accepted, mexico was pissed, and both sides rushed troops to the border...even though the real border was never clearly defined i belive the historic was the neeches river, mexico claimed the brazos, and the us the rio grande. needless to say the armies found each other and started shooting. america won the war, and got most of mexicos northern territories, and the rio grande as a southern border, but then took parts of north texas away from texas to help pay for the war(texas northern border as i recall once went almost to colorado) all this recited from memory, may be off on a few points, but mostly accurate.
thast only true if you are racist to begain with, no one is talking about closing down the borders. they are saying the are like 163 countries on this planet, and waiting list to get into this country. why should ppl be allowed to just walk across the border skipping the whole process we have set up, and there is no reasonable argument for a open border. they only ppl who are really against this are mexicans, because it stops them from abusing the fact we share a border. its not about closing the border, its about controlling it, hence my personal immigration slogan, "fewer old mexican day workers, more hot asian chicks!"
skin color matters not. we arent talking about immigrants. immigrants move here for a btter life, attempt to integrate, become citizens etc. most of the problem is these ppl are moving here, for the money, we pay better, provide free services, and better security. they apparently have no desire to try and become american for any other reason than to not get deported, they PROUDLY tell you they are mexican(or hondurian etc) and how much better their country is. they dont try to fit in. worse because of the attitude, their children dont fit in either. i know grown men who were BORN in the us who cant speak english. plus it leads to a major increase in crime. yes i know i am generalizing, there are a great many who are upstanding citizens, and most dont really cause any trouble. but enough of them do that it dosent matter that some dont. in this day and age we can not have open borders. out social services net cant handle our current pop, let alone millions of other ppl who take more than they give. and as much as i hate to say it, 90% of the trouble comes from mexicans, apprently because they only thing that seperates the 2 countries is a line on the map, they feel entitled to come here and do as they please. almost every immigrant i ever talked to expressed joy to be in this country, except those from south of the border. they take all they can with care for what they give back, those arent immigrants, they are parasites. same as if i moved to canada for cheap meds, but then did not try to become canadian.
""Come now didn't the Republicans try and have Clinton impeached for a BJ? Where's his privacy? Of course that was a criminal act but only because the femme in question was not hot. I mean come on he's the president! When he scores we all do so it should be something more than what I can bring home on a Friday night,""
he was impeached for lying under oath. A white house intern claimed she was fired after she refused an advance from pres. clinton. he said under oath that he never had made any advances at anyone. then monica was uncovered. then we all go obssessed with what the definition of "is" is, and foregot this started out as a sexual harrassment complaint.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022