DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: FOX News Refuses To Run "Rescue The Constitution" Ad
Never mind - I misread someone's post.
Never mind - I misread someone's post.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
That's all fine and dandy if you applaud someone becoming a monster to defeat a monster.
But the constitution doesn't allow it. That's something you haven't seemed to ever understood.
INDY500 said:
If you're scoring at home.
Allowed by the constitution:
Killing terrorists -- No
Killing babies -- Yes
INDY500 said:
If you're scoring at home.
Allowed by the constitution:
Killing terrorists -- No
Killing babies -- Yes
AchtungBono said:
The only thing I understand is that the U.S. was brutally attacked on 9/11 and 3,000 people were murdered.......and their murderers must be dealt with viciously.
How can the U.S. ever hope to fight the war on terror with one arm tied behind its back??
AchtungBono said:
If you or your family were threatened, you'd make damm sure they were safe and sound using any means necessary to provide for their safety - and so would I.
AchtungBono said:
I've said on more than one occasion that the constitution was drafted in the 18th century and must be updated and revised to meet 21st century conditions and threats.
AchtungBono said:
While we're on the subject......tell the victims of the Nebraska mall shooter how wonderful the constitution is.....it's a great thing the right to bear arms.....where anyone can buy a gun and go on a rampage whenever they want - hallelujah and god bless America.......
Well you've never been a fan of our constitution to begin with, be honest. You don't like our free speech, you don't like a lot of things.AchtungBono said:
With all due respect to the constitution, we aren't living in the same world as the founding fathers were. We face new challenges and greater dangers and I'm sure Al Quaida would have made mincemeat out of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had they been around at that time.
INDY500 said:I apologize as well. As a Fox News viewer I may have used language (terrorist, unborn child) that viewers of other news channels may not be comfortable with. So allow me to change my wording.
Allowed by the constitution:
Killing misguided international criminals -- No
Woman's right to choose -- Yes
AchtungBono said:Since when is saving lives against the constitution? You don't know what kind of information the government is obtaining thru these methods that have prevented countless attacks from happening again in the U.S. .
Bottom line - You fight fire with fire and terrorism with terrorism because that's the only language the terrorists understand.
You don't fight terrorism by gentle persuasion.....only by brute force.
I APPLAUD the U.S. government for going after the terrorists using their own methods, and I applaud President Bush for doing his job.
AchtungBono said:The only thing I understand is that the U.S. was brutally attacked on 9/11 and 3,000 people were murdered.......and their murderers must be dealt with viciously.
How can the U.S. ever hope to fight the war on terror with one arm tied behind its back??
If you or your family were threatened, you'd make damm sure they were safe and sound using any means necessary to provide for their safety - and so would I.
I've said on more than one occasion that the constitution was drafted in the 18th century and must be updated and revised to meet 21st century conditions and threats.
With all due respect to the constitution, we aren't living in the same world as the founding fathers were. We face new challenges and greater dangers and I'm sure Al Quaida would have made mincemeat out of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had they been around at that time.
INDY500 said:Killing misguided international criminals -- No
Woman's right to choose -- Yes
AchtungBono said:
The only thing I understand is that the U.S. was brutally attacked on 9/11 and 3,000 people were murdered.......and their murderers must be dealt with viciously.
How can the U.S. ever hope to fight the war on terror with one arm tied behind its back??
If you or your family were threatened, you'd make damm sure they were safe and sound using any means necessary to provide for their safety - and so would I.
I've said on more than one occasion that the constitution was drafted in the 18th century and must be updated and revised to meet 21st century conditions and threats.
While we're on the subject......tell the victims of the Nebraska mall shooter how wonderful the constitution is.....it's a great thing the right to bear arms.....where anyone can buy a gun and go on a rampage whenever they want - hallelujah and god bless America.......
With all due respect to the constitution, we aren't living in the same world as the founding fathers were. We face new challenges and greater dangers and I'm sure Al Quaida would have made mincemeat out of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had they been around at that time.
BVS - as always, this post is NOT intended to insult or offend you (or anyone else) - just to get my point across.
phillyfan26 said:
Let me revise your wording again:
Killing or torturing criminal suspects - No
Woman's right to choose - Yes
INDY500 said:
I realize there are some that read more into the Constitution than I do.
INDY500 said:But, in both cases, I realize there are some that read more into the Constitution than I do.
AchtungBono said:Since when is saving lives against the constitution?
AchtungBono said:Bottom line - You fight fire with fire and terrorism with terrorism because that's the only language the terrorists understand.
You don't fight terrorism by gentle persuasion.....only by brute force.
If you or your family were threatened, you'd make damm sure they were safe and sound using any means necessary to provide for their safety - and so would I.
Or...given credit that no addition attacks have occurred within our borders.Moonlit_Angel said:
if I used illegal means to deal with someone who threatened my family or myself, I would expect to be punished for my crimes. And this administration needs to be held accountable for its crimes.
Angela
INDY500 said:
Or...given credit that no addition attacks have occurred within our borders.
INDY500 said:
Or...given credit that no addition attacks have occurred within our borders.
Earnie Shavers said:None occured in the 9 years between the two Trade Centre attacks either.
INDY500 said:Neither the Bill of Rights nor habeas corpus rights extend beyond our borders or to foreign prisoners of war.
BonoVoxSupastar said:Dave, they are all terrorists, we don't have to prove it.