RE: FIrst they came...

RE: FIrst they came... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rulemylife -> RE: FIrst they came... (10/10/2011 7:39:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet What the hell are you talking about? Because if you are talking about hunting down Al Qaeda members like the dogs they are, I believe that is the single best thing Obama has done in his whole presidency. And by the way, your paraphrase is very insulting to victims of the holocaust. Obama didn't do anything. Good job Navy Seals. Another brilliant statement Popeye. I wonder who it was who ordered the Navy Seals in? Could it have been the Commander-in-Chief? Nah..........you're right, they just did it on their own.

Lucylastic -> RE: FIrst they came... (10/10/2011 7:41:00 AM)
Bush called it in while Obama was in the mens room[8\|][8\|][8\|][8\|][8\|]

StrangerThan -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 7:58:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Maybe when you nitpick next time, you should be a bit more thorough. And maybe you should either read your own sources or be more precise when picking nits. What Franklin's papers show is an evolving quote penned four years before the version you want to use to bitch-slap the OP. You can adopt whatever version you like. Both are attributed to Franklin, one earlier than the other. What it shows more than anything is that he came up with a good thought, and finessed it. So what you did was look at Franklin's papers, then go hunt down sources that supported your thought because you changed years in there dear from 1759 to 1756. The first mention occurs in February 1755. The wording you attribute did not appear until months later. All of which is meaningless to the OP, as all quotes preserve the intent and flavor of the idea.

tazzygirl -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:09:18 AM)
Oh my goodness... Months later???? Such a huge time difference there. Or is it the four years? Which is it? Point of fact, he wrote those words himself in the Letter. Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. Is a whole lot different than... "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." As far as the dates, those were not my words, but direct quotes from sources I gave.

StrangerThan -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:13:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Oh my goodness... Months later???? Such a huge time difference there. Or is it the four years? Which is it? Point of fact, he wrote those words himself in the Letter. Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. Is a whole lot different than... "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." As far as the dates, those were not my words, but direct quotes from sources I gave. Your original post quoted a source from 1759. The version that quote references occurred in November 1755. The original version attributed to Franklin occurred in February 1755. Whether it's months later or four years later depends on which of your posts you're referencing.

hot4bondage -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:13:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: We need a president who believes that our rights are truly inalienable. And who is that going to be? Ron Paul is the only candidate that's questioned the constitutionality of this unprecedented action. Perry, Romney, Bachmann, and, of course, Santorum, all support it.

tazzygirl -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:19:26 AM)
quote: Your original post quoted a source from 1759. The version that quote references occurred in November 1755. The original version attributed to Franklin occurred in February 1755. Whether it's months later or four years later depends on which of your posts you're referencing. So you are denying that he wrote what I posted.

mnottertail -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:21:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hot4bondage quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: We need a president who believes that our rights are truly inalienable. And who is that going to be? Ron Paul is the only candidate that's questioned the constitutionality of this unprecedented action. Perry, Romney, Bachmann, and, of course, Santorum, all support it. Well, thats more concern then, he should bone up on the constitution, you would think that after 20+ years in the congress he woulda heard of that document, at least.

tazzygirl -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:23:26 AM)
Didnt they read it out loud recently? Its not like any of them can say they didnt hear it at least once.

mnottertail -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:26:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Didnt they read it out loud recently? Its not like any of them can say they didnt hear it at least once. Only parts of it, so they could take it out of context correctly.

Lucylastic -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:26:48 AM)
didnt he bring up impeachment???? guys a dipstick!

tazzygirl -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:28:01 AM)
Ok.. here is a pop quiz... What is the difference between essential liberty and freedom?

mnottertail -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:29:42 AM)
kev, is tazzy one of your sockpuppets? LOL, I crack myself up.

tazzygirl -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:33:10 AM)
rofl.. no Master Ron

thompsonx -> RE: FIrst they came... (10/10/2011 8:49:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet What the hell are you talking about? Because if you are talking about hunting down Al Qaeda members like the dogs they are, I believe that is the single best thing Obama has done in his whole presidency. And by the way, your paraphrase is very insulting to victims of the holocaust. Obama didn't do anything. Good job Navy Seals. For a man who claims to have spent a carear in the military you do not seem to know the first thing about the chain of command or how he millitary works. The navy (of which the seals are a part) does what the president tells them to do. The seals do not innitiate policy. The seals do not, on their own innitiative, go half way around the world to kill someone without direct orders from the president. Both your claim to be an independent and a veteran seem to lack the validation that actual service or commitment to a cause would engender.

StrangerThan -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 8:54:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Your original post quoted a source from 1759. The version that quote references occurred in November 1755. The original version attributed to Franklin occurred in February 1755. Whether it's months later or four years later depends on which of your posts you're referencing. So you are denying that he wrote what I posted. Nope. What you are denying is that what you used to correct the OP isn't the original reference, and doing so because it allows you to "be right" when in fact, there is no direct quote that can attest with any veracity what he originally said. I know, you want to play word games. Go ahead. The evidence is in Franklin's Papers. Everything else is mostly an interpretation of them.

thompsonx -> RE: FIrst they came... (10/10/2011 9:08:06 AM)
quote: Adam Yahiye Gadahn was on October 11, 2006 indicted based on the testimony of the FBI case agent E.J. Hilbert II, in the Southern Division of the United States District Court for the Central District of California by a federal grand jury for the capital crime of treason for aiding an enemy of the United States (i.e. Al-Qaeda). Gadahn is the first American charged with treason since Tomoya Kawakita in 1952. Arron burr was charged with treason and was acquited because the constitution requires two witnesses to treason not just one. On the face of it it would seem that the indictement suffers from multiple legal issues

tazzygirl -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 9:22:22 AM)
quote: Nope. What you are denying is that what you used to correct the OP isn't the original reference, and doing so because it allows you to "be right" when in fact, there is no direct quote that can attest with any veracity what he originally said. Show me where I ever said once it was the "original reference". You seem to enjoy shoving words into my mouth. And again, there is a world of difference between what she posted and what I posted.

LafayetteLady -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 4:59:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Nope. What you are denying is that what you used to correct the OP isn't the original reference, and doing so because it allows you to "be right" when in fact, there is no direct quote that can attest with any veracity what he originally said. Show me where I ever said once it was the "original reference". You seem to enjoy shoving words into my mouth. And again, there is a world of difference between what she posted and what I posted. Oh for Christ's sake! No one cares when the quote came up. Care to deal with the topic as opposed to the research capabilities the two of you have?

tazzygirl -> RE: First they came... (10/10/2011 5:01:07 PM)
Nope. I prefer to piss you off. [:D] If you dont like the direction, then dont read it. Some of us get off on the research aspects. Frankly, my dear, I dont give a damn what you dont like or dont like. [:D]

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.1103516