[CNorris]

Originally Posted by anabolicrhino

well, maybe one

Last I checked it was the democrats wanting to limit free speech with the "fairness" doctirine.

[anabolicrhino]

Originally Posted by CNorris

I would love to get a gun and rid this planet of some useless flesh.

WAIT A MINUTE !!! SUICIDE IS NOT THE ANSWER !!!

[zbtboy]

Originally Posted by CNorris

Last I checked it was the democrats wanting to limit free speech with the "fairness" doctirine.

Yes cause the fairness doctrine is much worse than an executive order allowing the president to detain anyone he thinks is a threat to him. That poor old woman that had cheese in her luggage, surrounded with ice packs that leaked, and a cell phone charger next to it (that this administration seems to think was a "dry-run" for terrorists)...I'm sure she's more concerned with the fairness doctrine.

[CNorris]

Originally Posted by zbtboy

Yes cause the fairness doctrine is much worse than an executive order allowing the president to detain anyone he thinks is a threat to him. That poor old woman that had cheese in her luggage, surrounded with ice packs that leaked, and a cell phone charger next to it (that this administration seems to think was a "dry-run" for terrorists)...I'm sure she's more concerned with the fairness doctrine.

Oh yeah its so alarmist to be suspicious when someone has freaking wires, switches and cheese all taped together. If you are retarded enough to freaking bring cheese in your luggage bag you are an idiot and being stripped searched and harassed is brought on by your own stupidity.

TSA to police: Look out for possible terrorist attack 'dry runs' - CNN.com

Looks pretty innocent to me! If you are threatened by the government being alarmed over this, you are the kind of person that would get attacked first if this was a fair world.


Since you cant F#CKING read, I will repeat myself.

Originally Posted by CNorris

"I hereby report that I have issued an Executive Order blocking property of persons determined to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq or undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people."

Since when is commiting acts of voilence a form of protesting? I wish left wing idiot protesters became violent. I would love to get a gun and rid this planet of some useless flesh.

violence
violence
violence
violence
violence
violence

ITS NOT PROTESTING. SEE!

violence
violence
violence

[CNorris]

When a person is offended by the government investigating why wires and cheese would be taped together, and not offended by the government controlling media like a Stalinist society we have a problem.

[Frank Costanza]

Originally Posted by Tiberius

I'm just waiting for Bobo and Dr. John to chime in here.

Its just funny watching the paranoid people especially when BDS kicks in.

[CNorris]

Originally Posted by Bobo

Its just funny watching the paranoid people especially when BDS kicks in.

I had to look up BDS. Bush Derangement Syndrome
BDS must be the after effect of PEST. Post Election Selection Trauma.

[Iron Warrior]

Let's get real guys.

1. No one in here is a threat to the peace and prosperity of Iraq here. Let's not believe for a second that the gov't will start rounding up Americans who don't vote republican. We're all just a bunch of bodybuilders, not terrorists. It's just more scare tactics which can even further divide us citizens if we allow it to.

2. Everything gets blown out of proportion when you're the president. People hated Clinton because he got a blow job, smoked weed, and just about pardoned every crook he knew. People hate Bush because they think he is stupid or because he nearly choked on a pretzel, or because they compare him to Hitler. It seems as if the only way a president is considered a hero by the masses is if he gets assassinated like Lincoln or Kennedy.

3. A lot of people attack Bush from a corruption angle but let's be real. Every administration has had corruption and scandals. Even the NBA is fukcing rigged now a day LOL.

4. If someone is posing a violent threat then I would hope we do something about it, don't you ? The president is in a no win situation. If he passes no bill then he will get criticized for not passing enough anti-terror bills. If he passes an anti-terror bill then he's suddenly compared to Hitler or Stalin. It's just impossible to satisfy all the people all the time.

[zbtboy]

Originally Posted by CNorris

Oh yeah its so alarmist to be suspicious when someone has freaking wires, switches and cheese all taped together. If you are retarded enough to freaking bring cheese in your luggage bag you are an idiot and being stripped searched and harassed is brought on by your own stupidity.

TSA to police: Look out for possible terrorist attack 'dry runs' - CNN.com

Looks pretty innocent to me! If you are threatened by the government being alarmed over this, you are the kind of person that would get attacked first if this was a fair world.


Since you cant F#CKING read, I will repeat myself.



violence
violence
violence
violence
violence
violence

ITS NOT PROTESTING. SEE!

violence
violence
violence

Actually. if you bothered to read the facts as opposed to just believing what CNN tells you (I cant believe i just made that comment to you btw) you'll find that in none of the instances in which the TSA brought up had wires been tapped to cheese. The wires, one for a cell phone, and the other for a dvd player were simply next to the block of cheese. And the claim about clay was incorrect as well. There was no clay at all, but a clay like texture after the ice bags leaked. In other words, there was NO DRY RUN at all. Just more fear mongering out of Washington. The TSA on the scene conducted their investigations and found no wrong doing in any of the circumstances! No arrests were made! Yet the high level TSA comes out with this crap?

Again, the issue was not why the TSA stopped these people. They did their jobs quite well. But why did washington feel the need to use the term "Dry-Run" when there in fact wasn't one??

I dont know why i bother explaining this to you, your helpless and i feel sorry for you.

[Frank Costanza]

Originally Posted by zbtboy

Actually. if you bothered to read the facts as opposed to just believing what CNN tells you (I cant believe i just made that comment to you btw) you'll find that in none of the instances in which the TSA brought up had wires been tapped to cheese. The wires, one for a cell phone, and the other for a dvd player were simply next to the block of cheese. And the claim about clay was incorrect as well. There was no clay at all, but a clay like texture after the ice bags leaked. In other words, there was NO DRY RUN at all. Just more fear mongering out of Washington. The TSA on the scene conducted their investigations and found no wrong doing in any of the circumstances! No arrests were made! Yet the high level TSA comes out with this crap?

Again, the issue was not why the TSA stopped these people. They did their jobs quite well. But why did washington feel the need to use the term "Dry-Run" when there in fact wasn't one??

I dont know why i bother explaining this to you, your helpless and i feel sorry for you.

BDS in full effect.

Again, the issue was not why the TSA stopped these people.

It isn't? Oh I got it, its because they used the term dry run in a memo. Stop the presses!!!!

That poor old woman that had cheese in her luggage, surrounded with ice packs that leaked, and a cell phone charger next to it

You do understand that to determine if its a legit dry run or not they do actually have to stop and investigate...but I forgot, its not why they stopped them.

cause the fairness doctrine is much worse than an executive order allowing the president to detain anyone he thinks is a threat to him.

Do you always misinterpret this bad? Its always been policy to detain anyone showing and or even speaking about threatening the President. I got a bet for you. Go to Washington, go to the White House, hold up your anti-war protest sign and see if you get arrested. If you do, I'll give you $1,000 and pay for your trip. Lets just see how bad you misinterpret these Executive Orders.

[Frank Costanza]

Originally Posted by Iron Warrior

If someone is posing a violent threat then I would hope we do something about it, don't you ? The president is in a no win situation. If he passes no bill then he will get criticized for not passing enough anti-terror bills. If he passes an anti-terror bill then he's suddenly compared to Hitler or Stalin. It's just impossible to satisfy all the people all the time.

Bush can win. He can pass all these laws and become dictator for the next year and a half!!!!! Thats been his plan all along!!!!

[zbtboy]

Originally Posted by Bobo

BDS in full effect.



It isn't? Oh I got it, its because they used the term dry run in a memo. Stop the presses!!!!

You do understand that to determine if its a legit dry run or not they do actually have to stop and investigate...but I forgot, its not why they stopped them.

uuuhhh.... The memo came out after this event took place, not before it. The local TSA on scene did their jobs and investigated these events and determined that there was no dry run at all, that there was no connection to terrorism, and that these people were not threats. The local TSA did their jobs and did it quite well. Why then did the TSA in washington leak out that terrorists were attempting dry runs when there was absolutely no evidence at all to support that claim? Why did the media run with it like we were going to be attacked tomorrow?

[Frank Costanza]

Originally Posted by zbtboy

Why did the media run with it like we were going to be attacked tomorrow?

So its the TSA's fault for the drama that MSNBC started? I got it...TSA leaked information that spanned from Sept 16th, 2006 to
July 5th, 2007 because they wanted to create fear among the people.....its not because they wanted to keep everyone aware considering the failed JFK plot, London and Glasgow...its because they have another agenda!

It could never be MSNBC's their fault for trying to break a story...rather its this administration and the TSA (which you now think is washington).


.....and I know how the TSA (or in your terms Washington) loves to give MSNBC, that bastion of right wing news, the scoop....

[Tiberius]

The argument about "violence" and then saying "protest doesn't qualify" isn't true. Because it doesn't say you have to commit an act of violence, it just says you have to pose a risk of committed an act of violance at some point in the distant future. So if you protest and they say "hey that guy is really adamant in his views, he might resort to violence if he doesn't get his way" they can use that as justification for seizing eveyrthign he has.


I think folks here are forgetting about something really important. Rights aren't about what law enforcement DOES, they are about what law enforcement CAN LEGALLY DO. So for example, let's say they made it legal to search houses of terrorists without any kind of warrant. You can say, "well they are only going to use it on terrorists", but the problem with that is no due process was given in order to determine the person is in fact a terrorist. As a result, law enforcement can make that decision without oversight. When they can do that, even though they probably WON'T searhc yoru house, they CAN. Because they CAN the 5th ammendment is no longer valid.


You can try and say "oh they won't abuse it, you're being paranoid", and my argument is simply, just because they won't doesn't matter. The point of rights is to remove the possibility of abuse. The bill of rights protect the American people from the American government. Giving the government the power of search and seizure over US citizens without a warrant, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, compeltely invalidates the 5th ammendment protetions against illegal search and seizure. Will they search your house? Probably not. Can they? Most definitely. THAT is the point.



EDIT: Correction, 4th ammendment deals with search and seizure. 5th ammendment however address seizure of property.