Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: China


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: China Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: China - 3/2/2007 10:14:52 AM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
To a twenty year old closed minded woman: Is anyone being harmed by what the U.S. is doing?.....caitlyn why don't you answer that question if you can?


Probably. One would imagine that almost anything done by anyone, will harm someone.
 
Not really my point though. What I'm saying, is that I don't think Europeans have any moral high ground on this issue, given their history. I'm not sure how that is being closed minded, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Generally, if all you have is an attack on my age, you will please excuse me if that doesn't bother me overly.
 
Now, I do have an opinion on China ... that we are sort of making them a superpower out of thin air, and that they still have some serious flaws to overcome. I guess you could consider me closed minded in that area. I don't even see China as a country that wants to be a superpower, other than an economic one. That's probably a good decision on their part.

(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: China - 3/2/2007 10:18:49 AM   
luckydog1


Posts: 2736
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline 		I sugest that anyone interested actually read article 1 section 8 and see how farg is making this stuff up.  There is no article 2 section 8, so I assume that was a typo.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: China - 3/2/2007 10:20:14 AM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline 		I don't accept anything ... only understand it. If I had my way, I assure you, we would all throw away our guns, and have a big party.
 
I think though, that you have to accept that even though many European countries are completely against what the United States is doing in reference to those they call terrorists ... these groups seem to still be attacking those countries anyway. There are many conclusions that we can draw from this, but since these are your countries, and not mine, you can draw whatever conclusions you like.
 
China is also not some nice peaceful power, that will make the world all better. The same holds true for Europe. I don't think you really have any of our best interests at heart ... only your own. I would live to think otherwise, but know a bit about European history.

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: China - 3/2/2007 10:48:48 AM   
Stephann


Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		Fargle,

You still haven't pointed out where 'invasion' specifically is spelled out as an illegal act.  Perhaps you assume the only meaning of 'War' in the constitution was the card game, by the same name.  Do let me know when the legal proceedings against these leaders gets underway. 

Something important caitlyn pointed out will probably get lost in the shuffle.  A quick look at the several thousand years of Chinese history doesn't read like a fairy tale.  It's fraught with corruption, greed, war, violence, rape, exploitation; in fact the only people who treated the Chinese worse than Americans or Japanese were the Chinese.

What we see as a 'country' has almost as many people as all of Europe, and just about as many languages, religions, and differing traditions.  The fact that Europeans (and by extension, Americans) could not understand these languages or cultures, meant simply that we assumed they were 'all the same.'  To boot, all of Asia tends to be clumped together as being 'part of China.'  It's naivety to assume that just because they seem peaceful and happy, that they are.  I'm sure a quick look at peasants working the fields in France or Germany looked equally 'peaceful' and 'happy.'

Stephan

_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: China - 3/2/2007 10:57:26 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

I sugest that anyone interested actually read article 1 section 8 and see how farg is making this stuff up. There is no article 2 section 8, so I assume that was a typo.


No Coffee Makes farglebargle's fingers sad. T/Y for the correction.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to luckydog1)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: China - 3/2/2007 11:09:37 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann

Fargle,

You still haven't pointed out where 'invasion' specifically is spelled out as an illegal act.


The violation of 18 USC 371 happened PRE AUMF-Iraq. PRE-Invasion. The point being that unless Congress gives you money to do things, you don't HAVE money to do things. If you don't have money to do things, but do them, WHERE did the money come from? Only place it could come from is by lying to Congress about what Other Money was going to be used for, then redirect it.

The President ASKS if he may do things. Congress TELLS the President what he must do. Bush started EARLY, and fucked up by not getting the money up front. OR Getting Congress' permission.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: China - 3/2/2007 11:22:28 AM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		caitlyn an apology for singling you out....I actually agree for the most part with caitlyn and Stephan...China as of right now could not afford a war without tremendous losses...the question is how relevant would those losses be to those in charge?  China works in a capitalistic fashion in most of it's larger cities...They have an extreme rural, under/uneducated percent of the population, as well as the problem with different beliefs and dialects within their country.

They are building into an economic power. Which will have ramifications world wide.  We have lived in a world of isolation and are now paying the price...As technology can run via the internet and I listen to sub susie on a conference call which includes folks from India, Brazil, Europe and the States...Our lifestyles haveand will continue to be affected as more jobs go overseas....Can't be helped or denied...we will pay the price as their economies are lifted to meet that of our own.

I am rambling a bit...But I am a dumb liberal. Don't adhere to all liberal "think," but do find myself to the left on most issues.  We do have a choice as a country...We portray ourselves as being a kind and helping to people and for the most part we are...Aid to tsunami victims etc....But our gov't (not just this one, thought it is not helping at all) sends a different view of America to the world.  What if we took just a portion of the assets spent on this war and put ti to helping and building up Africa...By not doing so we will be dealing with a "lost" population in the future...People who don't believe/have something will cling to anything....Talk about a hot bed for future problems.

Rambling now....bye ...bye.

< Message edited by domiguy -- 3/2/2007 11:24:28 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: China - 3/2/2007 11:25:41 AM   
Stephann


Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		Calm down there, big fella, I can read small caps and large the same.

There's several checks and balances written into the constitution.  The president is Commander in Chief; that means he decides who, where, when, and why the military fights.  It can be argued that this is a measure that gives a name, face, and personal responsibility in the usage of military force to resolve diplomatic objectives.  A similar power would include the President's constitutional authority to sign a treaty.

Part of this balance system includes the congressional requirement to ratify a treaty, and pay for the army.  The president may have the power to do what he wishes with the army, but if he goes against congressional wishes long enough, eventually his funding will be pulled.  Had his actions actually been far enough outside of the scope of Congressional desings, they have the right to impeach him.  They don't have to find him 'guilty' of a crime, to remove his ass from office.

So, lets review.  Congress makes laws.  Congress declares war.  Presidents enforce federal authority.  Presidents make war.  The law has been observed.

No amount of hype and bold faced words will likely change the facts, nor put Bush in jail in the near future.  You are, of course, welcome to attempt to file a lawsuit against the man, if you wish, but a combination of presidential immunity (per the constitution) and lack of authorization to sue the government (without the attorny general's permission, per US title codes) will likely return your frustration and lawsuit back where it started; venting on a message board.

Stephan

permission

_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: China - 3/2/2007 12:15:53 PM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

I think though, that you have to accept that even though many European countries are completely against what the United States is doing in reference to those they call terrorists ... these groups seem to still be attacking those countries anyway. There are many conclusions that we can draw from this, but since these are your countries, and not mine, you can draw whatever conclusions you like.
 


I fully understand why muslim terrorists are attacking European countries, it is no surprise, we've been hypocritical and mendatious in the middle east for decades and gave extremists someone to blame for their failing economies and culture.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn
China is also not some nice peaceful power, that will make the world all better. The same holds true for Europe. I don't think you really have any of our best interests at heart ... only your own. I would live to think otherwise, but know a bit about European history.


I never said China as a superpower would be better than the USA. I said it depends who you are and that it wouldn't be better for Europe but probably will be for Africa and the middle east, areas of the world which the west has exploited and been Machaivellian.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 3/2/2007 12:17:23 PM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: China - 3/2/2007 12:25:33 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		It appears they you're bolding text in your replies, and my truncation of the message at my response point is trashing the closing b tag.

Yeah, you're using weird fonts and shit, too.

Use plaintext.

< Message edited by farglebargle -- 3/2/2007 12:32:18 PM >

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: China - 3/2/2007 12:31:22 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann

Calm down there, big fella, I can read small caps and large the same.

There's several checks and balances written into the constitution. The president is Commander in Chief; that means he decides who, where, when, and why the military fights.


Then why is CONGRESS the body delegated with the authority to declare War? That declaration, and ONLY THAT determines WHO and WHY the military fights.

WHERE and WHEN are best left to Staff Officers and below. The Executive *should* set Policy, Joint Chiefs & Generals Strategy, and Units the Tactics. The WHERE and WHEN being the realm of Strategy.

quote:


So, lets review. Congress makes laws. Congress declares war. Presidents enforce federal authority. Presidents make war. The law has been observed.


Where's the Declaration of War by Congress to make the Presidents CONDUCT of War Lawful?

And get over the whole, "I didn't close your bold-tag" whining. Don't use them in the first place, and you won't have to suffer the indignity of your typography being trashed.




_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: China - 3/2/2007 3:57:01 PM   
Stephann


Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		No offense intended, but I've been using this font well before you joined the forums.  My 'bold' isn't an expression of enthusiasm, it's just to make the Georgia font legible.  I like when people use distinctive fonts, it's easier to 'see' their voice.  Fortunately, we're all free to use whatever font we like   I'm just pointing out that YOU don't NEED to WRITE like you're YELLING at ME to GET your POINT ACROSS. 

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Then why is CONGRESS the body delegated with the authority to declare War? That declaration, and ONLY THAT determines WHO and WHY the military fights.

Now there's an interesting legal debate over this particular point.  The president is expressly declared Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy.  He is the one man with 100% authority and responsibility for the actions of the military.  Thus, if the military screws up, it's his head that may roll.  As we have seen throughout history, a state of war may exist whether the congress wishes to declare that state to exist, or not.  Your suggestion, means that in the event the Papal State attacked, say, Washington DC (that could destroy the capitol, and enough members of Congress in the process to make congressional business impossible) the President would not have the 'legal' authority to mobilize the military for a strike against them.  In effect, any country would be free to act with impunity since it would require a congressional act to engage in hostilities.  Clearly, this is nonsense.

In fact, in Public Law 93-148 (the War Powers Act of 1973) Congress attempted to restrict the powers of the President from waging war, without a declaration of war.  Essentially, the President may engage in any sort of military action, so long as congress declares war within 60 days of said actions; to continue to fight would require such a declaration.  Ironically, this particular act has been invoked, as well as Public Law 107-243, authorized the President to use force against Iraq.  Whether the acts were performed under a 'fraudulent' premise or not, this doesn't negate the legality of the activities, nor is it an effective positive argument that Congress has the power to create such laws in the first place.  Fundamentally, the President wages war.  Congress declares war.  The President could ignore a declaration of war, by simply refusing to send troops.  Congress can cut the purse strings on any war, or forcibly remove the President from office if they wish. 

For any law to have value, it must have teeth; the War Powers acts do not.  Votes do.

WHERE and WHEN are best left to Staff Officers and below. The Executive *should* set Policy, Joint Chiefs & Generals Strategy, and Units the Tactics. The WHERE and WHEN being the realm of Strategy.

Clearly, you've never spoken with many Generals, have you. 

It won't be Generals who are impeached when a war goes bad.  Permitting a system where seven or eight people are given the ultimate responsibility for being 'right' or 'wrong' means nobody will ever be held accountable for mistakes.

The real failure isn't in the hands on the President here.  The failure is in the will of the American people.  Millions of hands in the air, demanding 'justice' or 'answers' or 'retribution' against the evils of the world translate to poor policy decisions.

The more we demand our government to 'take care of us' without taking the time to understand who or what we are taking care of, the more trouble we will face.  The seeds of ignorance are poverty, disease, and war.  Naturally, it must be 'some raghead's' fault though.  Naturally, the abuses of these people come at the hands of our 'evil' president.  Naturally, the fault is someone other than me.

Ed Bundy

And get over the whole, "I didn't close your bold-tag" whining. Don't use them in the first place, and you won't have to suffer the indignity of your typography being trashed.

p.s. I don't care if you bold the text or not.  I care if you use caps to attempt to yell.

_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: China - 3/2/2007 5:13:54 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann
Now there's an interesting legal debate over this particular point.


Only among those who don't like what the Constitution clearly says.

quote:


As we have seen throughout history, a state of war may exist whether the congress wishes to declare that state to exist, or not.


Since ONLY CONGRESS may declare war, you are incorrect. A State of War CANNOT EXIST without an Act of Congress. Which is why Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General is on-record stating to Congress that the AUMF is NOT a Declaration of War consistent with the Constitution and Treaty.

Now, criminals may break the law and send troops to die, but don't pretend it's either lawful or Constitutional.

Congress declared War on Japan the day after Pearl Harbor, and declared War on Germany the same day they declared war on the US.

The question then becomes, why is Congress such a bunch of spineless pussies, they don't bitchslap the executive back into submission?



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: China - 3/2/2007 5:15:48 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Millions of hands in the air, demanding 'justice' or 'answers' or 'retribution' against the evils of the world translate to poor policy decisions.


No one but the Propagandists at the Pentagon like Doug Feith were calling for any of that. The People would have been satisfied by the capture and trial of the actual perps of 9/11.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: China - 3/2/2007 5:36:40 PM   
Stephann


Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		Are you suggesting that Japan should have asked Congress to declare war, before they attacked?

Or perhaps you're saying that PL 107-243 should be repealed? 

If the actions are indeed illegal, why aren't you filing that lawsuit I suggested?

No one but the Propagandists at the Pentagon like Doug Feith were calling for any of that. The People would have been satisfied by the capture and trial of the actual perps of 9/11.

So, Bush's re-election was a fluke?  Again, kindly stop making him into a little Hitler.  He has power, because the American people want to give it to him.  It's distasteful, disgraceful, and disgusting, but it's the bald faced truth.  Less time and effort railing against leaders we have chosen and paid to do our dirty work, and more time and effort into addressing the system and issues rationally as a society will yield far more responsible, realistic results.

I'm still waiting to hear where in the constitution the act of invasion is specifically illegal.  I'd settle for prosecution and conviction against a sitting or former president for such.  Absent these aspects, it's again time to look at the system in place, and wonder what we can do to make it better.

Then again, if we can't the yokels who can't keep a financial or military leash on said president, what exactly makes anyone think change is possible?  After all, we're drawing the 'talent' from the same old cross-bred gene pool in the first place.  I would hope for the death of the two party system, but they clearly embody our subconscious craving for the 'lessers' of two evils.

Stephan

< Message edited by Stephann -- 3/2/2007 5:37:43 PM >

_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: China - 3/2/2007 5:45:45 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann
Are you suggesting that Japan should have asked Congress to declare war, before they attacked?


Of course not. They attacked, Congress declared War, War was fought and won. No Problem.

quote:


Or perhaps you're saying that PL 107-243 should be repealed?


Why repeal it? It's been completed and is obsolete. Hussein was never a threat, but in any event his Government is gone, and they were never involved with the 9/11 perps, so that's over, too.

quote:


If the actions are indeed illegal, why aren't you filing that lawsuit I suggested?


Actually, it's the role of a Federal Prosecutor to present the case to a Grand Jury.

quote:


[/font]No one but the Propagandists at the Pentagon like Doug Feith were calling for any of that. The People would have been satisfied by the capture and trial of the actual perps of 9/11.

So, Bush's re-election was a fluke?


You one of those who believe elections mean anything, and aren't just a show for the gullible?

quote:


Again, kindly stop making him into a little Hitler.


Hitler used fear to con the Democratic Germans to give up Equal Protection and Due Process.
Bush used fear to con the Democratic Americans to give up Equal Protection and Due Process.

Aside from the body count ( Bush at less than a million, Hitler at 12 ) I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference in the M.O.s.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: China - 3/2/2007 6:21:42 PM   
Stephann


Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		Sad, that the China thread has become a Anti-Bush/Iraq thread.

Of course not. They attacked, Congress declared War, War was fought and won. No Problem.

You miss (or refuse?) the point.  When the Japanese started bombing, there was no declaration of war.  That didn't prevent the military commanders in Pearl Harbor from shooting back.  A state of war existed between Japan and the US the moment the Japanese fired their first shot, and dropped their first bomb.  A declaration of War is simply Congress recognizing that a State of War already exists.  The Constitution does not bar the Commander in Chief from acting unilaterally, except through the Congressional capacity to hamstring him financially, or remove him, politically.  Refusal to do either, on the part of Congress, implies a tacit agreement to support the President's activities.


Why repeal it? It's been completed and is obsolete. Hussein was never a threat, but in any event his Government is gone, and they were never involved with the 9/11 perps, so that's over, too.

There is the crux; this law represented Congressional sanction for his actions.  Not only was he acting within the scope of the Constitution, but also with Congresses direct support (financially, and politically.)  Hell, they can't even get the political will to condemn his actions.

Actually, it's the role of a Federal Prosecutor to present the case to a Grand Jury.

Sounds like you're passing the buck.  You don't need a Grand Jury to initiate a civil trial against the man.

You one of those who believe elections mean anything, and aren't just a show for the gullible?

You represent the heart of the problem; you don't believe that the elections mean anything.  As the vast majority of the American public agrees with you, those who step up to vote, literally, receive two ballots.  Blaming Bush for voter apathy is like blaming termites for having a wooden house.  Own some responsibility, my friend; too few of us do already.

Hitler used fear to con the Democratic Germans to give up Equal Protection and Due Process.
Bush used fear to con the Democratic Americans to give up Equal Protection and Due Process.

On the contrary; Hitler used the promise of jobs, a future, and dignity to convince Germans to give up their freedom of choice.  Bush has power, because Americans are too apathetic to exercise that freedom anymore.

This is the last parallel; following World War II, the Germans couldn't believe how they were so stupid to follow Hitler.  He was burned in effigy, and crucified in the media for being the source of Germany's destruction.  Doubtlessly, if Iraq (or Iran, or or any similar coalition) engaged the US and demolished it, we would be looking at Bush with the same sense of rage.  "It's his fault, he started this whole mess!"  That we were the victors, makes us no less morally reprehensible. Truly, until the American public is forced to reap their bitter harvest, and eat ash, any unpopular military or political activity will remain 'His fault, not mine!'

Stephan

_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: China - 3/2/2007 6:44:41 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann

You miss (or refuse?) the point. When the Japanese started bombing, there was no declaration of war. That didn't prevent the military commanders in Pearl Harbor from shooting back. A state of war existed between Japan and the US the moment the Japanese fired their first shot, and dropped their first bomb. A declaration of War is simply Congress recognizing that a State of War already exists. The Constitution does not bar the Commander in Chief from acting unilaterally, except through the Congressional capacity to hamstring him financially, or remove him, politically. Refusal to do either, on the part of Congress, implies a tacit agreement to support the President's activities.


If the president acts preemptively, where does he get the money, since Congress hasn't given him any money?

quote:


Sounds like you're passing the buck. You don't need a Grand Jury to initiate a civil trial against the man.


It's not a civil violation. It's a federal crime.


You one of those who believe elections mean anything, and aren't just a show for the gullible?
quote:


You represent the heart of the problem; you don't believe that the elections mean anything.


With professional experience in financial auditing and computer and facility security going back to the mid-eighties, I *know* they are meaningless. All REAL events can be audited. An OTB ticket is worth more than your vote. A Bon-Jovi ticket is worth more than your vote. These items are strictly tracked and audited because they represent real money.

It sucks, but there it is.


< Message edited by farglebargle -- 3/2/2007 6:47:21 PM >

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: China - 3/2/2007 6:54:00 PM   
Stephann


Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline 		Then, as an auditor, you're quite used to finding how other people are wrong.  The fact is that you, personally, carry just as much responsibility for the evils of our government as I am, as FirmHand, as Real0ne, indeed every single tax paying US citizen who contributes (or does not contribute) to the financial and electoral system that funds the activities.

The attitude, again, that "someone must pay" ensures that one day, we will pay.  And pay.  And pay.  All of us mind you; not just Americans, to boot.  Pointing a finger will not solve the problem.  I invite you to start investing your time and energy into activities that will result in more than a simple cyber condemnation that a week from now, will be ten pages lost.

Stephan


_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: China - 3/2/2007 7:27:00 PM   
sleazy


Posts: 781
Joined: 11/23/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle
Bush used fear to con the Democratic Americans to give up Equal Protection and Due Process.


Aint it a shame that most pertinent parts of patriot were drafted by the previous administration, Bush took on Clintons leftovers

_____________________________

Opinion is packaged by weight not volume, contents may settle during transit. Consult you medical practitioner. Do not attempt to stop moving parts by hand. Ensure all safety shields in place. Open this way up. Do not expose to temperatures exceeding 50C

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: China Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078