Quote from Rush Limbaugh's appearance on CBS evening news... - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-14-2006, 10:42 AM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

however, simply serving in the military does not automatically make one great and wonderful.
No, it is not automatic - greatness takes time to develop, and the military is one of the best institutions for producing greatness. Think of the Army Values (Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage) - who can argue angainst these qualities?

However, there is a small percentage of men and women who come into the military do not seek greatness, but remain self centered. These people are usually weeded out, but not always.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 11:25 AM   #92
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
1. pray tell, what is a "mock marriage"?
Redefiniton of marriage for the first time in human history, which is a non-issue in the states, unless a leftist judicial activist in Massachussetts overturns the will of the people.

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
2. the issue with the NSA wiretapping program was that the administration not only didn't get warrants, but that they said they didn't need to get warrants, even though you can get a warrant after the fact. THAT was the issue.
The Authorization of Use of Military Force was passed by Congress in 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks. It gave Bush the authority to order warrantless surveillance provided that the surveillance does not violate the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has historically recognized Fourth Amendment overrides in a time of war. As for those concerned about the feds screening phone calls, I wonder what kind of skeletons they are hiding in their closets. The NSA wiretapping program was not a violation of "civil liberties." It was a violation of terrorist liberties because it prevented attacks from being planned, and was an invaluable tool in foiling the recent terrorist plot in England.

The ACLU, being the America-hating, NAMBLA-loving communist suck-ups they are, have done everything outside of their power to protect Jihadists. Where is their "warrant" for acting like a fourth branch of government?
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 11:35 AM   #93
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
The ACLU, being the America-hating, NAMBLA-loving communist suck-ups they are, have done everything outside of their power to protect Jihadists. Where is their "warrant" for acting like a fourth branch of government?


this is totally inappropriate.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 11:36 AM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
The Brooklyn bridge example is a joke.
It's only a joke to the ignorant who want more bureaucracy to flood counter-terrorist operations.

Quote:
...a terrorism task force employed provisions of the Patriot Act to track down a man who was plotting attacks in New York and the Midwest. The man, Iyman Faris, pled guilty of plotting attacks on the Brooklyn Bridge (search) and an Ohio mall after he saw the case against him.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159043,00.html
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 11:37 AM   #95
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
this is totally inappropriate.
Really? They don't support NAMBLA?
They want to protect Americans from Jihadists?
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 11:58 AM   #96
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Redefiniton of marriage for the first time in human history, which is a non-issue in the states, unless a leftist judicial activist in Massachussetts overturns the will of the people.



how strange that marriage equality is so threatening.



[q]The Authorization of Use of Military Force was passed by Congress in 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks. It gave Bush the authority to order warrantless surveillance provided that the surveillance does not violate the Constitution.[/q]


but it does violate the constitution. this domestic surveillance over American citizens without evidence or proof that they are involved in any illegal activity. all they need to do is get a warrant. and they can even get a warrant after the fact. Congress passed a law in 1978 making it a criminal offense to eavesdrop on Americans without judicial oversight, this was constitutional. the Administration had been secretly breaking the law, and then pleaded with The New York Times not to reveal this, and then they claimed that executive powers gave them the right to break the law. this is about the unfettered expansion of executive powers, which is the path to tyranny.



Quote:
The Supreme Court has historically recognized Fourth Amendment overrides in a time of war. As for those concerned about the feds screening phone calls, I wonder what kind of skeletons they are hiding in their closets. The NSA wiretapping program was not a violation of "civil liberties." It was a violation of terrorist liberties because it prevented attacks from being planned, and was an invaluable tool in foiling the recent terrorist plot in England.

how did the NSA wiretapping prevent the London plot? that was Scotland Yard's doing, not the CIA.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:00 PM   #97
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe


The ACLU, being the America-hating, NAMBLA-loving communist suck-ups they are, have done everything outside of their power to protect Jihadists. Where is their "warrant" for acting like a fourth branch of government?
Not only is this inappropriate it's completely untrue.

I was wondering if you saw the students suspended for wearing 9/11 shirts thread? Sounds so America hating doesn't.

You know, you would get a lot more done, and perhaps even some credibility, if you didn't use such extreme hateful reactions.

Mock marriages? Death worshipping? America hating? These terms you use are bullshit.

Oh it also wouldn't hurt to use facts.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:02 PM   #98
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Really? They don't support NAMBLA?
They want to protect Americans from Jihadists?


[q]ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations (8/31/2000)

NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.

What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not.

It is easy to defend freedom of speech when the message is something many people find at least reasonable. But the defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive. That was true when the Nazis marched in Skokie. It remains true today.[/q]
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:03 PM   #99
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Redefiniton of marriage for the first time in human history, which is a non-issue in the states, unless a leftist judicial activist in Massachussetts overturns the will of the people.

Except for when marriage was one man and many women, man and pre-teen girls, oh and then there was that time it was defined as white man and white woman/ black man and black woman.

Oh, but don't let facts get in the way. Spew on with your hate.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:04 PM   #100
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 10:53 AM
traditional marriage, or, better, biblical marriage, was one man and many girls, starting when they were 13.

but that's another topic.

though we haven't had a good gay marriage thread in a while
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:10 PM   #101
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




this is totally inappropriate.
I actually kind of agree with Mac there. The ACLU protects certain groups and chides others.
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:12 PM   #102
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Justin24


I actually kind of agree with Mac there. The ACLU protects certain groups and chides others.


[q]ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations (8/31/2000)

NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.

What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not.

It is easy to defend freedom of speech when the message is something many people find at least reasonable. But the defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive. That was true when the Nazis marched in Skokie. It remains true today.[/q]
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:15 PM   #103
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 08:53 AM
Let me as you something Irvine. Let's say a highschool group wants to create a christian club in school or have a time for prayer that does not interfere with class should they have a right too? Or do you think the ACLU and school district ban this group. I am sure they would be banned due to seperation of church and state.

Now if Muslims did the same and since we are in Sensitive times I am sure it would be allowed.
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:19 PM   #104
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Justin24
Let me as you something Irvine. Let's say a highschool group wants to create a christian club in school or have a time for prayer that does not interfere with class should they have a right too? Or do you think the ACLU and school district ban this group. I am sure they would be banned due to seperation of church and state.

Now if Muslims did the same and since we are in Sensitive times I am sure it would be allowed.
Has this happened? Until then, just like I told Mac, stick to the facts.

Both of you have very little when it comes to the ACLU...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 12:27 PM   #105
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Except for when marriage was one man and many women, man and pre-teen girls, oh and then there was that time it was defined as white man and white woman/ black man and black woman.
Interracial marriage is a totally different issue. Your race is a proven concrete gene that you are born with.

Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Oh, but don't let facts get in the way. Spew on with your hate.
What a stupid, thoughtless comment. Anything that isn't liberal is apparently hateful to you.
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com