posted
- Nov 24th: Obama administration swears in new USNCB (Interpol WA) Director Justice.gov
- Dec 7th: Executive branch's EPA declares greenhouse gasses harmful to humans and subject to regulation ABC
- Dec 9th: In an unprecedented way, Executive Branch pushes for legislation when this White House statement is released: "If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."
- Dec 9th: U.S. National Central Bureau (INTERPOL Washington) hosts its FIRST U.S. Interagency Environmental Crime Meeting USDOJ.GOV"Environmental crime is any breach of a national or international environmental law or treaty that exists to ensure the conservation and sustainability of the world’s environment"...."Topics of discussion at today’s event will focus on INTERPOL’s activity in the support of laws associated with wildlife, pollution, forestry, fisheries, natural resources, water, protected areas, bio-security, and climate change and ways INTERPOL’s Environmental Crime Program assists its member countries in the effective enforcement of environmental laws."
- Dec 16th. Executive Order -- Amending Executive Order 12425 by granting immunity to INTERPOL Whitehouse.gov and Refuses Explanation
- Dec 18th. Obama Addresses Copenhagen Climate Change Conference.
posted
Dec 1: U.S. golfer Tiger Woods announces that he will not be attending his own charity golf tournament, the Chevron World Challenge, or any other tournaments in 2009.
Dec 23: Afghan senator Mohammad Younus and his son/driver are fatally shot by police in Puli Khumri, Baghlan Province.
Dec 31: Patrick Stewart, the actor who played Captain Jean-Luc Picard in Star Trek: The Next Generation and Professor X in X-Men, is knighted by Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom.
Jan 1st: China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) launch a Free Trade Area.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Maybe Obama was on Air Force One on his way to Copenhagen when he signed the executive order granting immunity from US law to INTERPOL while Interpol was having their first ever US Interagency Environmental Crime Meeting to enforce any breach of national or international law or treaty concerning climate change. A couple weeks after Obama replaced the head of Interpol US, of course. Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sure no one would dispute the fact that even the president isn't above the law. His executive order made someone who is answerable to him, above the law.
There are no Interpol agents. There are no interpol police, only police under the interpol banner. From their own website:
"Are there INTERPOL agents? INTERPOL does not have its own operational agents, but rather utilizes the services of the police and law enforcement authorities in each of its 186 member countries."
Immunity has been granted to your local police so long as they are operating under the interpol banner. In another post I shared my story of this legal maneuvering. I was Navy but boarded boats under a coast guard flag. Only the coast guard could legally do what we did. The Captain of our navy vessel temporarily turned over command to a coast guard officer to remain within international law. A USN destroyer with 300 Navy Sailors and 2 Coast guard officers....perfectly legal. For a few hours, I wasn't in the navy, I was in the coast guard. Your local police officer can be an interpol officer just as I was a coast guard sailor.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:His executive order made someone who is answerable to him, above the law.
Mal, do you really not understand what this Order does? I ask this because several people have told you the facts of the matter, but you have not once acknowledged their corrections and continue to appear misinformed.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's a nice shot of Eric Holder Swearing in the Director of INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau (USNCB) http://www.justice.gov/usncb/ True, Obama and Holder don't have political immunity. Obama and Holder aren't immune from the Freedom Of Information Act but USNCB is. The director of USNCB answers to them. Talk about plausible deniability.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Dec 31: Patrick Stewart, the actor who played Captain Jean-Luc Picard in Star Trek: The Next Generation and Professor X in X-Men, is knighted by Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom.
Hey, I missed hearing about that. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you all about to do the old tactic of talking nonsense to bury a post you can't rebut with facts? I've seen it on many a Hatrack post..the gang decides to debate their favorite flavor of ice cream to bury a post. Are you surprised Obama is a one world government leader?
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You've been rebutted numerous times. People are discussing other things because they're bored with you ignoring posts dissecting your position.
The Interpol order normalized the privileges given to Interpol to be like other international organizations, such as the World Tourism Organization. Almost all the parts of their immunity that you rail against were granted by Reagan, not Obama, and none of those parts makes any American citizen immune to prosecution for violating US laws. Stop lying about it.
Yes, Obama is interested in more work to protect the environment and combat climate change. He has made no secret of that. Why do you think it is surprising that his whitehouse works to accomplish goals the President has?
The EPA reclassification was entirely legal. Do you have some complaint about it?
As for Interpol's meeting, are you for people violating laws? They've picked an area of law of particular interest nowadays, with many violators, and met to discuss how to deal with things.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Numerous times? We're still on page 1 of this post.
The EPA is a wing of the executive branch. What they did was legal. What they did was unprecedented but the whim of their boss, Obama. If McCain were president, they wouldn't have made that announcement. Obama is exercising his power through the executive branches. The EPA has been there for decades but only decided this after Obama appointed a New Orleans Community Organizer to be a head of it. A woman who encourages green jobs for the redistribution of wealth. Green is the new red.
The World Tourism Organization doesn't have legal policing authority over me. The immuninites Reagan granted them were equal to our police and FBI. Reagan did grant them partial immunity like other international organizations. He specifically exempted from that immunity taxes, search and seizure and prosecution. Essentially, he limited Interpol to the same constraints as any US Law Enforcement Ofganization. Obama exempted them from search, seizure, prosecution, lawsuit, etc. Reagan did give them access with limitation...Obama gave them complete immunity while pushing for them to have more power. IE Copenhagen. If the US signs on to an international green treaty, INTERPOL has enforcement power and immunity from search of records and prosecution. An immunity even our own law enforcement agencies have never enjoyed.
posted
Unprecedented in decades? The EPA adds harmful substances to their list fairly regularly. What makes it unprecedented? Is it unprecedented for you to dislike their decision? Well, probably, since I doubt you paid any attention to them until it was a political rallying cry for you.
Interpol doesn't have policing authority over you either. It does not have police power in any situation. If an interpol officer 'arrests' you, it is abduction, just like it is abduction if a member of the World Tourism Organization 'arrests' you. None of the immunities granted to Interpol the organization are granted to members acting outside of their remit.
Prove that Interpol has "policing authority" over me. Provide the law that gives it to them. Ditto this "enforcement power" you say they have.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Unprecedented in decades? The EPA adds harmful substances to their list fairly regularly. What makes it unprecedented? Is it unprecedented for you to dislike their decision? Well, probably, since I doubt you paid any attention to them until it was a political rallying cry for you.
*snort* That was fairly awesome fugu13.
----
In other news, I did have a delicious mango tart flavored frozen yogurt yesterday, with semi-sweet chocolate chips. It was quite tasty and competitively priced! $0.30/oz to be precise.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um,...yes completely unprecedented. The head of the EPA is appointed by the president of the US. In the entire history of the EPA, they have never decided to regulate "green house gasses" they were established to regulate pollution. It is unprecedented for them to deem what a mammal exhales or farts to be a pollutant. If the president doesn't agree with the head of the EPA, he's gone. If McCain were president, farts and exhilations wouldn't be considered pollution...methane...C02. I'm not sure I want to live in a world where the government regulates my farts and breath. EPA is not independent...Obama appointed a greeny/communist/community organizer.
The green movement is the new communist movement. Van Jones left the Communist Party to become an environmental activist. Green is the new red.
posted
Ah, unprecedented in the sense of "this is the first time they did it wrong, and by wrong I mean something I don't like".
You're also factually wrong. You can take a look at the list here: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/orig189.html . Several of them are generated by natural human activity. For instance, Methanol is another thing we breathe out in exhalations (that is generated internally when our cells work anaerobically).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is unprecedented for them to deem what a mammal exhales or farts to be a pollutant.
Speaking as someone whose wife has spent the last decade doing dairy forage research, I can tell you that you are definitively wrong on this point.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, because ignoring direct questions or refutations about and to your far-right conservative spiel isn't a trademark of yours on this forum. Nope. Ask anybody! Folks will be baffled anyone associates you with behavior like that.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: In other news, I did have a delicious mango tart flavored frozen yogurt yesterday...
The fact that I saw an "f" instead of a "t" in the word "tart" means I should go home and get some sleep...
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Dec 31: Patrick Stewart, the actor who played Captain Jean-Luc Picard in Star Trek: The Next Generation and Professor X in X-Men, is knighted by Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom.
Did this have to do with his playing Claudius with the Royal Shakespeare Company last year? I'm still bummed I missed that.
Posts: 354 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's a dvd you can order on the RSC website. The BBC made a televised version. It's not exactly the same as on a live stage, but it's darned good still. I can't wait for mine to arrive!
Posts: 2849 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The supreme court made the right decision concerning the EPA. The supreme court ruled that the EPA must enforce laws it was created to enforce. The supreme court didn't order the EPA to regulate "green house" gasses, it ordered that the EPA must do what it was founded to do...protect people from pollutants. They said that if the EPA decided that green house gasses were a danger to people, then the EPA must do its legal duty and regulate them. The supreme court did not make a global warming decision, it simply clarified the legal duties of the EPA. The EPA director is appointed by the executive branch. The EPA Director declared farts and exhilations to be a danger to humanity. Not on the basis of pollution but climate change. Obama being the chief executive could order the EPA to retract,...the EPA works for him. It isn't law but regulation. They want law, hence the threat to congress I mentioned earlier. The ironic thing is the Executive Branch via EPA is in no position to blackmail the congress to pass a law. Congress could pass legislation that the EPA shall not regulate so called green house gasses.
If you are on the left you had better hope they pass the legislation now. Even the Senate Majority Leader has announced he isn't going to run again. The socialist/marxist/enviro-nazi's have 10 months to do what they want. The left will lose the congress in 2010 and the presidency in 2012. No president on record has had this low an approval rating within his first year in office.
Is CSPAN covering the debates? The most open and ethical government ever, hah. Almost every one I know who voted Obama regrets it today. Not seeing too many Obama bumper stickers anymore. Sulk out in the middle of the night and scrape off that humiliating stamp. Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy and you fell for a politicians empty promises.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, have it pointed out your "facts" are nonsense, and just start ranting. Ah well, I knew it wasn't worth it.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
If you want to equate Obama with Reagan...Reagan was reelected and Obama's policies are the polar opposite of Reagan's. What got Reagan reelected was a low tax free market policy. In fact, Reagan followed Carter....Obama is Carter Redux. Rasmussen is historically the most accurate polling organization. According to Rasmussen, Obama has the lowest first year. If Obama cared about jobs and the economy, he would cut taxes.
Obama's promises:
- CSPAN for healthcare debate. - Close GITMO - Get out of Iraq - Unemployment below 8% if we pass stimulus - No more lobbyists and special interests
We're still in Iraq. Stimulus passed and we have >10% unemployment. Gitmo is still open. The current healthcare debate is completely behind closed doors. He increased troop levels. Obama's administration is full of lobbyists and special interests, especially unions. The healthcare bill panders to drug companies and the "evil" insurers. We have an administration that wants to make it a federal law to purchase insurance from these evil insurance companies. They do not care about reality or true reform, all they care about is a bill, despite its contents. Obama doesn't care about healthcare, he cares about reelection. A bad healthcare bill is better than none at all, at least he can run for reelection on the basis of passing healthcare reform. Lets be honest. One side wants free market, the other want single payer. Are the single payer proponents happy? Both sides know this is a pile of crap for their position but it doesn't matter because 51% of American's can't even name the VP. When the next election comes, they'll hear that Obama passed healthcare reform. Since he "reformed" the system, he must have made it better. You on the left should be more outraged than I. He's going to pass a law that all people must pay the evil insurance companies for services they may not want. I'd rather have your single payer system....everyone paying the government for healthcare is better than this special interest deal.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:You on the left should be more outraged than I.
I'm not even particularly leftist, but I'm pretty sure I am more outraged than you are. At least about actual events.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
2009 most deaths ever in the war in Afghanistan. 2009 most brazen Iran activity. 2009 most brazen North Korean activity. 2009 most domestic acts of terrorism ever. 2009 highest forclosure rate since the great dep. 2009 unprecedented job losses in the US.
2009 Obama won nobel peace prize 2009 Obama increased troop levels by 30k
2009 The year Obama instantly judged a police officer but took 3 days to speak about a terrorist. 2009 The year we forgot the 911 commission report and reverted to treating terrorists as criminals.
2010 The year Americans realize strong leaders are more important than good speakers.
Our enemies respect a cowboy more than a peace prize winner. Our nation will see the fruits of Obama's "historic" Cairo speech. This panzy has put our nation in danger. Our enemy will not stop until the entire world is a theocracy of Sharia law. This pussy in power only emboldens them.
Who is going to stop them?
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh. That you're worried about Sharia law only makes my point for me, mal. Feel free to join me in outrage about real things at some point. The water's fine.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I understand you think it is laughable. A minor tumor in the breast of woman is laughable as well. How could that minor tumor spread enough to overtake the body? Only the paranoid could imagine a cluster of cells spreading and overtaking the body.
Being a democratic mindset person, I understand the skeptisism...Sharia mindset people will never be a democratic majority. If 5% of your population supports jihad, the 95% will live in terror. Iran is not ruled by the majority, it is ruled by a sharia minority. 1% police following Sharia can subdue the other 99%.....to a point. We had a great opportunity to help Iran in 2009,...unfortunately Obama took the wrong side. Just as he did with the countries of Georgia and Honduras.
His knee jerk reaction is to take the side of the statist/communist/tyrant. Hell, his czars praise Chavez, Che, Castro and Mao, what should we expect.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Any overt help to Iran this year would have killed their Green Revolution, led to the deaths of hundreds more people and likely would have potentially validated (or at least provided a veneer of rhetorical validation) to enemies of ours in the Islamic world.
posted
The only "overt" help Obama provided was to declare their election free and democratic. He overtly supported the result. His silence would've been better. Even better, evil CIA support to the opposition. Instead Obama validated their BS election and thousands are dead and/or in prison. If we are to maintain the high ground, taking no position is preferable. He did take a position in Georgia, Honduras and Iran. He didn't remain neutral and remain silent...he supported the tyrant.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, he said he was "deeply disturbed". He also said:
We respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran[.]"
In other words, we're pissed but we don't want the government to use us (the U.S.A) as a scapegoat. Oh, and we've blown way too much cash on two wars and can't really afford a third front.
Although I could understand if one were unfamiliar with subtle diplomacy given our country's recent past. This type of talk used to be common, from both Republican and Democratic presidents.
Posts: 7021 | Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Eaquae Legit: There's a dvd you can order on the RSC website. The BBC made a televised version. It's not exactly the same as on a live stage, but it's darned good still. I can't wait for mine to arrive!
quote:Our enemies respect a cowboy more than a peace prize winner. Our nation will see the fruits of Obama's "historic" Cairo speech. This panzy has put our nation in danger. Our enemy will not stop until the entire world is a theocracy of Sharia law. This pussy in power only emboldens them.
Our enemies don't 'respect' any American leader, certainly not in the sense you mean: respect as in fear to cross. Malanthrop, Osama bin Laden (just as the biggest, most infamous example) made his bones fighting the freakin' Soviet Union. Now, surely even you would have to agree that if you want to dumb down foreign policy to a comparison between cowboys and pansies, the USSR weren't pansies.
And yet, somehow, Osama bin Laden wasn't cowed. Somehow, naked force didn't work. Someone who wasn't a far-right wingnut hack might look at that historical example and wonder if perhaps, if maybe just maybe, relying overwhelmingly on force when considering how to deal with a militant fanatic might not be the most effective approach.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mal, you make some interesting points. Mind if I take a moment to look at them? I mean, if all you really want to do is spout unproved points until we surrender to bluster, I won't waste my time, but if you want to discuss these things, I will try.
In fact, you remind me a lot of Iran and North Korea. You complain that nobody takes your discussions seriously, then you ignore, attack or dis anybody who does discuss things, as if you see discussion as a sign of weakness.
2009 most deaths ever in the war in Afghanistan: Yes. After 8 years of Republican Cowboy diplomacy that considered Afghanistan good enough and ignored it to fester, we've had a bad year. This is the war President Bush, your favorite Cowboy President, wanted to do on the "cheap".
2009 most brazen Iran activity: Really? I thought the year the took over the US Embassy and held American hostages was more brazen.
Or their was their invasion of Iraq. That was really brazen.
In 2009 they pushed for Nuclear weapons and launched ever more powerful missiles. While that is very disturbing, your use of "most Brazen" diminishes your argument and makes you appear alarmist.
2009 most brazen North Korean activity.
Again--Invasion of South Korea after WWII, a bit more brazen.
Selling Nuclear Tech to all buyers during the previous decades--a bit more brazen.
Still, they launched missiles. Nope, still can't see this as the most brazen, or even the top 10.
2009 most domestic acts of terrorism ever. I'd like to see counts on that. We didn't have a couple of guys in Washington DC sniping at random drivers. We didn't have McVeigh. Where is this number coming from?
2009 highest foreclosure rate since the great dep. Actually, that would be 2008. Foreclosures were higher the end of last year.
2009 unprecedented job losses in the US. 10% is less than the Great Depression. So their is a precedent. While its bad, its not as bad as you make it sound, so you sound like an alarmist who should be ignored.
2009 Obama won nobel peace prize. That is a good thing as most people are concerned. Further, its not as if he ran for Peace Prize Winner, or did anything special just so that he could win it.
2009 Obama increased troop levels by 30k. He did a lot more than that. The 30K was only after a spring rise as well. But that is only in Afghanistan. He lowered them in Iraq.
2009 The year Obama instantly judged a police officer but took 3 days to speak about a terrorist.
The police officer thing was off the top of his head on something he was not involved with, like me talking about a crime somewhere else. The terrorist thing was his responsibility. You make it sound like he waited to determine the guilt of the terrorist. He was waiting to find out how he got the bomb on the plane. Not the same thing at all.
2009 The year we forgot the 911 commission report and reverted to treating terrorists as criminals. This is a false dichotomy. The 911 Report did not say we had to treat terrorism like war. Where did you get that idea?
2010 The year Americans realize strong leaders are more important than good speakers. Another interesting dichotomy. This claims that President Obama is only a good speaker, and weak and that is his big difference than our previous leader. There is also a reliance on facts over faith and the virtue of competence over President Bush's main loved virtue of loyalty. What you see as a man who talks nice but is weak, I see as a man who would rather do the right thing than respond with random violence.
quote:Our enemies respect a cowboy more than a peace prize winner.
Didn't you just criticize the President for sending more troops to Afghanistan? I've seen lots of polls, but not one showed respect for our previous Cowboy.
quote: Our nation will see the fruits of Obama's "historic" Cairo speech. This panzy has put our nation in danger.
No evidence for this, just your fear. Are you really so afraid of the terrorists that you would deny even a chance for peace with any arab for fear that they will somehow force you into subservience?
quote: Our enemy will not stop until the entire world is a theocracy of Sharia law.
Which enemy is that? North Korea has no desire for Sharia law, or do you not consider them a US enemy? Castro? A good Communist Shia law? Or how about the other Communists out there? The drug cartels in Mexico?
You label one group as "our enemy" which is far more of a liberty than anyone elected president can take.
quote:This pussy in power only emboldens them.
Please refrain from vulgarity on Hatrack.
By Pussy, do you mean womanly man? Are you being a bit sexist in saying that woman can't be tough? Or are you, by calling the most powerful man on the planet a "pansy" trying to be degrading to homosexuals?
Did you perhaps mean pussy cat, and just forgot the cat? Or were you after the term whimp, but wanted to go the extra bit by insulting the man as well. The insult makes you lose credibility I am afraid.
quote:Who is going to stop them?
Our brave men and women in uniform--straight and gay. Our police, our security people, and as was proven on Christmas eve, in the worst case scenario, our citizens will stand up and stop them.
One thing they won't do? Cower in fear because somebody starts shouting and extolling all the reasons we've lost and we should run in fear.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: I understand you think it is laughable. A minor tumor in the breast of woman is laughable as well.
:SNORT: Did anyone else see this and get a weird image of a non-specific foreigner with a nasal voice, wearing an armani suit and holding a nickel plated revolver casually at some action hero?
Mal, honestly, it's absurd. Funny, sort of, but really absurd.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: I understand you think it is laughable. A minor tumor in the breast of woman is laughable as well.
:SNORT: Did anyone else see this and get a weird image of a non-specific foreigner with a nasal voice, wearing an armani suit and holding a nickel plated revolver casually at some action hero?
Mal, honestly, it's absurd. Funny, sort of, but really absurd.
Obsurd? ONE illiterate primitive from Nigeria has our entire country bound in knots this week. This is one person....there are over 300 million Americans. One person straps explosives in his underwear and the entire nation is afraid. Also this week, one guy sneaks past TSA to give a kiss to his girl....the airport delays all flights for 11 hours and sends thousands of passengers out of the airport into 15 degree weather.
Yeah, I'm crazy to think that an extreme minority could devastate a nation. If one half of one percent of your town decided to drop backpack bombs in public, your entire town would be on fire.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
To be fair, I live in metro Detroit, I see planes overhead all the time, and could thus be the victim of a theoretical crashing play that's in a landing pattern at Detroit Metro Airport. And I'm not afraid at all. I wasn't when the story first broke, I wasn't during any of the hours and hours and hours of local and national coverage. And I'm not now.
Security is going to do the best that they can do, and after that, it might as well be an act of God for all the good worrying will do about it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not afraid either because the individual has decided to step up and keep us safe. An individual on that aircraft climbed over seats, stripped the pants off the terrorist, burning his hands, put the terrorist in a choke hold and saved lives. Rely on the government, count on an air marshal and that plane would've crashed into your neighborhood. After the shoe bomber, all Americans must take their shoes off...will we be dropping our drawers now? This is the point of terrorism...Americans will suffer and lose liberty/privacy due to this one attempt. There will be more attempts and our government will respond by punishing the American people. Maybe there will be an attack on the super bowl....and from here on forth all American's will have to take off their shoes to enter a sports game. Then they'll detonate a bomb on a bus, train or in a mall. Then we'll have to go through TSA style screenings to enter the mall. We argue about pilots carrying guns,...all law abiding Americans should be able to carry guns anywhere they want. We don't need Air Marshals. A law abiding citizen is just as good...even better. Profile them and let the "militia" protect America. The militia is an armed civilian populace. There are more armed robberies in cities with gun bans. Political correctness will be our downfall.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
Some might consider it racist, or Eurocentric. I mean, if you are calling him primitive because he straps explosives to his underwear, that is understandable. If you call him primitive because he's from Nigeria, that is just, well, really narrow minded of you.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
.
