Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

          

Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: Pastors Challenge Law, Endorse Candidates From Pulpit
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Pastors Challenge Law, Endorse Candidates From Pulpit
Posted: 6/20/2008 7:18:40 PM
.
Yah but there are religions that do not advertise publically with a name and simply push their agendas through legislation. Thats usually when you see other religions reacting like that.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 56 (view)
 
Headline Reads Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/20/2008 8:01:51 AM

your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe,
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 55 (view)
 
Headline Reads Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/20/2008 7:31:55 AM

I've never seen any hatred expressed against any Christians here, in any way. That's still true. People are free to worship as they choose, without interference. That belief does not give them the right to use their religion as a weapon against others. .



Of course not, you dont have free speech. You have to come to a country that has free speech to hear things like that.





Michael Swift: "Gay Revolutionary"

from Gay Community News, Feb. 15-21, 1987

(reprinted from The Congressional Record, with preface restored)

In 1987, Michael Swift was asked to contribute an editorial piece to GCN, an important gay community magazine, although well to the left of most American gay and lesbian opinion. A decade later this text, printed in the Congressional Record is repeatedly cited, apparently verbatim, by the religious right as evidence of the "Gay Agenda". The video Gay Rights, Special Rights, put out by Lou Sheldon's Traditional Values Coalition cites it with ominous music and picture of children. But when the religious rights cites this text, they always omit, as does the Congressional record, the vital first line, which sets the context for the piece. In other words, every other version of this found on the net is part of the radical right's great lie about gay people. For a discussion of the whole "Gay vs. Religious Right" phenomenon see Chris Bull and John Gallagher: Perfect Enemies: The Religious Right, the Gay Movement, and the Politics of the 1990s, (New York: Crown, 1996)

This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.

We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too, and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand the depth and feeling, the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.

All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.

If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies.

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man; we shall make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas. The museums of the world will be filled only with paintings of graceful, naked lads.

Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable and de rigueur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule, devices which we are skilled in employing.

We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you find that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators,your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar, bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled.

We shall raise vast private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.

The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence--will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.

All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society of homoeroticism will be indulgence in the Greek passion. Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.

"We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

"We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.

http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~swift/


That first line was supposed to what incite pity for what was to follow?


They can live their lives as they choose, and all that's asked is that they respect the law, and other citizens rights.

Remember that Golden Rule ?



Of course! Its the Leauw

.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 64 (view)
 
Codex Alimentarius AKA Bill C-51 vitamin ban
Posted: 6/20/2008 4:05:51 AM
.
yup all it is, is the coporatization of herbals with the use of force of law.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 4 (view)
 
Blackwater mercenaries - your tax dollars at work.
Posted: 6/20/2008 3:42:43 AM
.
imho aside from the obvious shrinking american dollar, oil domination, our purpose in iraq is to destablize the region so we have an unending excuse to stay there and (cough), keep the peace.

Just like the creation of israel, look at the wonderful stabalizing effect that had and has for the region.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Well, there goes your privacy rights right out the window
Posted: 6/20/2008 3:19:40 AM
.
Yeh and unfortunately we can only vote them out AFTER the damage is done and you know it wont come up again to be repealed.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Blackwater mercenaries - your tax dollars at work.
Posted: 6/20/2008 3:12:17 AM
.
Sure and I suppose they were necesary in katrina too, to protect FEMA right?

Lovely guys we can be proud of.

On September 16 2007, Blackwater employees in Nisour Square, Baghdad shot and killed 17 Iraqi civilians, at least 14 of whom were killed "without cause" according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.[13] No charges have been laid.


Why have they not been prosecuted for war crimes in iraq?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 19 (view)
 
Why is there no Logic in Politics?
Posted: 6/20/2008 3:01:13 AM
.

Why is there no Logic in Politics?
huh? There is absolute perfect logic in politics.
Anytime it seems they are doing soemthing stupid it only means we are to dumb to figure it out.
Wanna talk about bush? Many claim he is the stoopidest.
I disagree
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 53 (view)
 
Headline Reads Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/19/2008 7:37:06 PM
They can live their lives as they choose, and all that's asked is that they respect the law, and other citizens rights.

Remember that Golden Rule ?



ah huh.... remember Judge Dredd?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Why is there no Logic in Politics?
Posted: 6/19/2008 2:59:12 PM
.
Because people in this country do not understand how politics is "supposed" to work. We shoudl be voting for whom ever we originally wanted period. and let the chips fall where they may from there.

If your person was gravez, or kucinich, or paul, hillary or whatever.... then vote for them and dont fall into the trap of voting for the least of 2 evils as you are voting for evil none the less!

Even well meaning politicians throw their support to a candidate in the same party and that is a complete abortion of the way the system is supposed to work. The founders did not like that parties were forming but they could not do anything about it because of our love for labels.

The biggest trap is the idiots who are entrenched in a party, to them its nothing more than a damn football game and rooting for their team.

So as for voting is concerned vote for your person regarless if they are running or not. We might get a few more jerks but that all we have to choose from anyway before things straighten out.

Then in the final analysis peeps should remember that the dubya 1 ran nafta through and the dems screamed bloody murder, then when billy bob got in he quietly passed it.

The moral of the story is that this is a great drama and show for the dummies cause in the end we get the same shit no matter who is in office.

They simply stopped listening to us a long time ago.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 1 (view)
 
America's Dumbest Congressmen,10 biggest fools on the Hill
Posted: 6/18/2008 9:14:01 PM
.

I found this rather interesting :)




America's Dumbest Congressmen
Radar ranks the 10 biggest fools on the Hill
By Holly Martins

Congress, as any CSPAN viewer can attest, has never been a bastion of intelligence. As far back as two centuries ago, Samuel Johnson was demeaning the nation's legislators as a "circus of rogues and fools." But when it comes to sheer stupidity, the men and women of the 109th have distinguished themselves as a breed apart.

Despite a notoriously compliant president and Republican majorities in both houses, they've spent over 600 days in session without conducting a shred of productive business, which is not to say they've just sat around. As the war in Iraq raged out of control, they futilely postured over an unconstitutional flag-burning amendment that was clearly destined to go up in flames. They rallied around the brain-dead Terry Schiavo after the Senate majority leader, watching her on television, claimed to detect signs of life. And their hijinks culminated this month with l'affaire Mark Foley, which raised the question of just who a guy needs to blow on the Hill to get the attention of the brain-dead House leadership.

But in a notably dumb year, perhaps the dumbest move came from Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, who sponsored a bill seeking $20 million in taxpayer money for a party to celebrate America's victory in Iraq. Not long ago such flagrant obtuseness might have ensured the senator a place on our annual list of America's Dumbest Congressmen. Alas, given this year's stiff competition, he didn't even make runner-up.


images/2006/10/Jim-Bunning-56177457.jpg
BREAKING BALLS Sen. Jim Bunning balks himself into office
10. Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Bunning is a Hall of Fame pitcher who, during his eight years in office, has shown "little interest in legislation that doesn't concern baseball," writes Time magazine. And Kentucky doesn't even have a major-league baseball team. His campaign style is so completely unhinged that political observers openly speculated in 2004 that the then-73-year-old was suffering from dementia or Alzheimer's. "His is a tragic case of descent into senility," says one Hill staffer, "except without the 'descent' bit." To scotch the rumors, Bunning was forced to hold a press conference and offer up doctor's reports.

Among his antics that year: Telling a group of GOP fundraisers that his Italian-American opponent, Daniel Mongiardo, physically resembled Saddam Hussein's sons, Uday and Qusay; referring on the stump to the tragic terror attacks of November 11, 2001; and adding a federal security detail to his campaign in the firm conviction that members of Al Qaeda—the masterminds of November 11—had targeted him for elimination. ("There may be strangers among us," he darkly informed a Paducah TV crew.)

The piece de resistance, though, was a debate with Mongiardo: Bunning notified event organizers at the eleventh hour that he was tied up with legislative business in Washington and would have to participate via satellite. During the event it was painfully obvious that the incumbent was delivering his debate points with the aid of a teleprompter, violating the event's ground rules. And whatever urgent business Bunning claimed to be in town for couldn't have had anything to do with his job—the Senate had gone into recess the previous Monday.

Continued......
http://www.radaronline.com/features/2006/10/americas_dumbest_congressmen_part_ii.php

.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Disgusting medical treatment of our vets
Posted: 6/18/2008 8:45:49 PM

Excellent medical care and quality high technology is not free.. so we have to stop complaining about the cost of healthcare. If we're going to try to improve VA Hospitals and clinics then we have to be willing to shift the budget a bit.. take from one area and give more to the Vets. Write your Congress person and demand a higher budget for the Vets medical care facilities and treatment.


There is nothing wrong with the budget imo, its the people involved in running the show and its not only the va. Its also the military trying to cover up DU poisoning by calling it "gulf war syndrome" is just that a syn. 11000 real death toll and 300,000 disabled from it. Then they repeat it all over in gulf 2. I think that sends a loud and clear message and this has nothing to do with partisonship as we only have one party with 2 names.

But its a great drama and a great show aint it?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 15 (view)
 
Disgusting medical treatment of our vets
Posted: 6/18/2008 8:42:28 PM

Let's face it, the entire government needs a cleaning of the gene pool so they act on OUR behalf and not theirs. Then things will get fixed very quickly.


Agreed then we need to wipe out the dualist laws and create new ones to prevent this from happening again.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 15 (view)
 
Stading Army - A problem?
Posted: 6/18/2008 8:29:09 PM
.
Maybe someone can help me here as I do not have the article handy, but if I do not have my wires crossed didnt this guy come to the us with the intention of meeting with dubya and dubya turned him down and didnt he then go to columbia university instead to talk with them?

Sound about right?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Stading Army - A problem?
Posted: 6/18/2008 7:14:37 PM

I think our founding fathers would want us to have a top of the line Defense Dept. especially if they knew what we face today with Iran and Nuclear proliferation and Terrorists who fly planes into buildings. I think they would also want us to be pro-active with counter terrorism tools.



Iran has tried to befriend us and we kicked them in the teeth. Even after we overthrew the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT and replaced it with a brutal DICTATORSHIP. Goog kermit rooseveldt for details.

The iran as the iraq as the afghanastan is all about oil and forcing these countries to continue to use tha shrinking american dollar that dipped below 2 cents a little while ago.

The founding fathers calculated the proper size of the militia to be roughly 2wice the size of the standing army with the same equipment.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 13 (view)
 
Stading Army - A problem?
Posted: 6/18/2008 7:07:33 PM

And yet a country without these things or similar will be rolled up like a carpet by those who do. Militias and an armed citizenry will offer only a plethora of targets but little resistance. Remember the scene in Red Dawn? Where a .45 pistol is sitting in the hand of a dead man under a bumper sticker that reads "They can take my guns out of my cold, dead hand"? And a Russian paratrooper takes it as a souvenir?


Short of dropping nukes on us I dont think this is true.

with 295,000,000 against what maybe 750,000 troops? Many of us x military ourselves?

They may have impressive toys but if people understand how to take them out its really not that difficult.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 10 (view)
 
we're all hypocrites
Posted: 6/18/2008 7:00:27 PM

It irritates me when wealthy people try to force greeness down our throats..

yes and they are the ones making money off of it!!
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 48 (view)
 
Headline Reads Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/18/2008 6:52:31 PM

A TOTAL disregard for the facts on my position - don't attack the messenger, attack the message.

I've shown my opinion of the exact letter, point by point.


So have I.

Oh come on......You praised the person who attacked the messenger, (me), accusing me of doing the same as screaming fire in a crowded theator when all I did was use the title of the article used by the author. If you goog it you get over 16000 hits so it seems a lot of others do not have an issue with it, and I have yet to get a response from you as to why you praised an attack on the messenger?



Hypocrisy ?

Good question?


How about answering the question I asked after it ? How about not running away from it ?


Same question to you.


So an unelected man can get up and promote hatred in an aggressive manner towards a group of fellow citizens - and then cry foul when other unelected men judge him ?


Mg; preachers preach the teachings of the bible and morals etc. They have done so long before canada was in existence.

What do you believe is being done differently today than was done 2000+++ years ago?


Didn't seem to bother HIM, did it ? Hypocrite. He uses a bully pulpit to strike out at others, and then trembles in his shoes when HIS rights are challenged - the same rights he willing refuses giving to others.


Calling a priest a hypocrite for preaching the biblical teachings and waging war against sin, like I said that which they have done since the begining of time is ludicrious. Thats what they do. Thats what they have always done!

What rights are you talking about the "right" not to be "insulted"? So the idea now is to legislate against insults? Isnt that a bit on the totalitarian thought police side of the fence?


Using that rational means the OP in this thread should be brought to that tribunal too, or did you forget that in your rush to judgment ?


Now I am not going to run back and quote them but you said things that could also be used to bring you up in front of a tribunal based on your own logic and defense for it.


I simply reversed the target of the attack, did not create the material, nor substantially re-write it (other than when needed to reproduce the attack on the attacker) , and submitted it in defense of the HRC's decision.


Being an american I laughed, I hear people like and even worse than hal lindsay talk about issues all the time and what this preacher said barely rates as strong much less hate!

Lindsay on his NY radio show said he felt anyone involved in this decision should be taken out and shot!

He also takes federal judges apart here in the us and expresses how he feels they should also be shot and how the federal marshal's bones break just as easily as anyone elses. Then he gives out numbers of all the people involved in the decisions and the american people stop by to have talks with them and express their feelings up close and personal like.

Now that IS FREE SPEECH and the exercizing of a RIGHT. (vulgar as that guy can be some times)

You can always tell when someone exercizes free speech because it will piss you off....


As opposed to your unelected unaccountable INDIVIDUAL, who is seeking to attack those protected by civil rights that already exist - and are unquestionable. The legislature and courts HAVE already decided these - a fact lost on both you and Boisson, it seems.


That is an extension of privilege not a Right.

What does electing have to do with a priest? unquestionable? That does not make any sense, unquestionable by whom?

This ruling clearly targets the privileges of group to prevent another group from being insulted. This is the precise reason that the founding fathers claimed democracy was inherently evil. 51% can dominate the remaining 49%.


This is exactly my argument. Those laws have been written, debated, passed in legislatures, made law, and then have been supported by the courts of the land.


That does not however make the just or right. Neither does that mean they are immutable and will never be changed.


Boisson has already invalided legislatures and courts, remember ?


Do you feel that your government is incapable of getting a dubya?, or even a bunch of dubyas in control? It seems to me that when a government stomps on one groups rights to support another something has gone awry, in which case boison would be completely correct.

Have you or anyone else performed an investigation to verify if boison is telling the truth about the government?

Do you simply agree with anything that your gov throws at you without so much as a second thought?


Boisson's saying that those lawyers, politicians and judges cannot be trusted, because of homosexual activists that have already subverted the systems in place. That's a logical conclusion, as those "activists" were able to use the existing politicians and judges to stealthy obtain rights they should not have - the one's they have today.


Well in my opinion your legislation is fundamentally to prevent insults and gag anyone who would disagree with that lifestyle in a public forum.


Over and over again, across the land, courts and legislatures have ruled gays have equal rights - equal to any other citizen.


I agree but this boison case is over the top and unequal to other citizens as there are many other sins that boison could have inserted in his proclamation that no one would have thought anything about.


A loss in a courtroom would severely limit what people like Boisson could publicly say, and that takes away everything they need to survive. It would silence most of the "anti-gay" movement in it's tracks, something that they are well aware of.


How about the anti muslim rhetoric?


Never did I say that gays do not or should not have equal rights. That's not the issue. I would defend their right to express themselves just as vigourously as I would defend Boisson's or yours. I am, for the record, an agnostic.

Agreed except I am an atheist. Yet I respect and will fight for true freedom of speech that which canada now has placed a gag on.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 40 (view)
 
Headline Reads Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/17/2008 10:32:09 PM
.
While some judges try to legislate from the bench, smart juries understand that they have the power to overturn literally anything based on the constitution as they know it setting "new precedence".

I was not aware you could do that in canada...got a link cuz I could not find anything on it?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 8 (view)
 
Disgusting medical treatment of our vets
Posted: 6/17/2008 9:49:14 PM
.
Ah my fav topic gov dirt!

Check this atrocity out!

Our guys that were in certain ares over there are not allowed to donate blood and get this....neither are their wives.

I checked this one out all the way to the top about 3 years ago and when you get to the top your calls no longer get returned. Whoda guessed?





Victimized by Depleted Uranium

Soldier says military ignores soldiers made gravely ill by tours in Iraq

By Mark Anderson

Sgt. Stanford Mendenhall is a member of the U.S. Army’s famed “Fighting 69th” Battalion who’s marooned at home with a variety of serious illnesses—while struggling to stay alive.

But for this soldier, the mother of all battles is taking place stateside, not in the distant sands of Iraq where powerful sandstorms blow around all manner of filth and toxins, as Mendenhall experienced directly.

The Suffolk County, N.Y. soldier understands that a number of other members of his battalion are a lot like him: Once supremely healthy, only to serve in Iraq and come home physically and psychologically shattered from innumerable illnesses that are both hard to explain and virtually impossible to treat.

Mendenhall and his wife, Linda, strongly suspect that a significant cause is depleted uranium exposure in the Iraq war. The same culprit is suspected in the cancer deaths of young soldiers in their 20s, as reported by AFP last year.

Almost at a total loss on what to do to help her husband—given the apparent unwillingness of the allegedly hostile military chain of command to help him—Linda explained their plight to American Free Press. He can’t work, she’s working full-time, money is scarce and, aside from sundry exams and some back surgery, the soldier claimed he has gone more than two years without proper medical care since leaving the battle theater.

Mendenhall—who’s now 45, having left Iraq in 2005 after just one year—has a number of vexing health problems. He said his problems started with persistent and severe back and chest pain. and that he now has chronic lung granuloma (sometimes linked to TB); along with pulmonary hypertension, osteoporosis, low testosterone and a metabolic bone disease that befuddled doctors at theMayo Clinic.

Blacks such as Mendenhall rarely get osteoporosis, he said, and it does not run in his family. His wife said he started out with the less severe osterperia but that it remarkably became full-blown osteoporosis in about one year, from 2006-07.

The Mayo doctors felt they could not treat Mendenhall and advised he get medical treatment from the Veterans Administration (VA) or a specialized military hospital such as Walter Reed.

Depleted uranium, or DU, first was widely used as a weapons component by U.S. forces in the First Gulf War. It’s an ultra-dense metallic substance that’s used defensively in armor, and is extensively used as a super-hard penetrating agent on the tip of explosive rounds to easily demolish armored vehicles and other hardened targets. Its detonation by U.S. forces, however, exposes combatants on both sides as well as civilians to radioactive fragments and aerosols, among other types of toxic fallout. It is dangerous and must be handled according to strict guidelines.

When widely used, it can contaminate soil and water, and can be ingested by unprotected troops and other people via the skin, through the lungs, open wounds etc. Other health hazards for soldiers cannot be written off. They include experimental vaccines, insecticides, diseasebearing pests etc.

Linda recalled how healthy her husband was all his life, until he served in Iraq in the infantry. She remembers him dashing out the door in the morning to work as a letter carrier.

He did heavy lifting all the time. “He was one of those people who didn’t even need an aspirin,” she said. Today, however, Mendenhall, who served in the Army a total of 22 years but has not been discharged, can hardly lift a thing. A tumor developed on a fracture on his back. He and his wife also must struggle with a military establishment whose chain of command makes him attend Medical Evaluation Board meetings that assess his status for possible disability-payment authorization down the road. But they have not given him “line of duty” status that could get him on an express lane to a proper military medical facility.

Then there is the “polite” brush-off the Mendenhalls have repeatedly received from Sen. Hillary Clinton (DN.Y.) when the former first lady’s legislative office was asked to help Mendenhall get the right treatment.Much the same from Sen. Charles Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) office: Apparent
“concern” expressed in returned calls, amid claims legislators “cannot tell the military what to do.”

The Mendenhalls have approached several private hospitals but were told that treatment must be obtained at military facilities. The run-around never seems to stop. Linda said she has placed 600 phone calls to Joseph J. Taluto, the adjutant general of the New York Army National Guard in Albany.

The purpose was to inquire about transportation, medical referral to Walter Reed, and incapacitation-pay issues. She said she sent Taluto 50 certified letters.

But Taluto—whose position puts him just under the governor in charge of New York National Guard units—allegedly never responded. Other military bureaucrats are said to have intervened to cancel appointments.

“They told us that the whole battalion was contaminated with DU,” Linda said, referring to a Family Readiness Group meeting (routinely assembled for all deployed battalions to meet with spouses and parents of soldiers).

Linda said her husband, with whom she has had four children, at times seems like he could pass away. But they don’t know what else to do—other than keep fighting. This is no longer the so-called “war on terror,” which was sparked by the 9-11-01 attacks. Instead, the war is here, against the very establishment for which the soldiers enlisted to fight.

(Issue #4, January 28, 2008)
http://www.americanfreepress.net/htm...g_69th122.html


Think its bad for us? Read below, there are reports that estimate there are over a million iraqis suffering from DU poisoning. I read one article where an iraqi woman said having a normal child without birth defects is the exception to the rul in areas where Du was esed extensively.


11,000 US Soldiers Dead from DU Poisoning
Bob Nichols - S.F. Bay View February 23, 2005

Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter charged Monday that the reason Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi stepped down earlier this month was the growing scandal surrounding the use of uranium munitions in the Iraq War.

Writing in Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter No. 169, Arthur N. Bernklau, executive director of Veterans for Constitutional Law in New York, stated, "The real reason for Mr. Principi's departure was really never given, however a special report published by eminent scientist Leuren Moret naming depleted uranium as the definitive cause of the 'Gulf War Syndrome' has fed a growing scandal about the continued use of uranium munitions by the US Military."

Bernklau continued, "This malady (from uranium munitions), that thousands of our military have suffered and died from, has finally been identified as the cause of this sickness, eliminating the guessing. The terrible truth is now being revealed."

He added, "Out of the 580,400 soldiers who served in GW1 (the first Gulf War), of them, 11,000 are now dead! By the year 2000, there were 325,000 on Permanent Medical Disability. This astounding number of 'Disabled Vets' means that a decade later, 56% of those soldiers who served have some form of permanent medical problems!" The disability rate for the wars of the last century was 5 percent; it was higher, 10 percent, in Viet Nam.

"The VA Secretary (Principi) was aware of this fact as far back as 2000," wrote Bernklau. "He, and the Bush administration have been hiding these facts, but now, thanks to Moret's report, (it) ... is far too big to hide or to cover up!"

"Terry Jamison, Public Affairs Specialist, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, Department of Veterans Affairs, at the VA Central Office, recently reported that 'Gulf Era Veterans' now on medical disability, since 1991, number 518,739 Veterans," said Berklau.

"The long-term effects have revealed that DU (uranium oxide) is a virtual death sentence," stated Berklau. "Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist, who retired from the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, and was also involved with the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid malignancies in the soldiers (from the 2003 Iraq War) as 'spectacular -- and a matter of concern!'"

When asked if the main purpose of using DU was for "destroying things and killing people," Fulk was more specific: "I would say it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people!"

Principi could not be reached for comment prior to deadline.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2837



Here are the symptoms:

Source of Information on DU Poisoning
by Rosalie Bertell, Ph.D., GNSH

I found a source of information on DU which will be helpful to anyone who testifies on the subject at the Senate Hearings. It is the Third (Revised) Edition of the Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety, Technical Editor: Dr. Luigi Parmeggiani, published by the International Labour Organization in 1983 (ISBN: 92-2-103289-2) Geneva, Switzerland.

In Volume 2 under uranium alloys and compounds, page 2238, it reads:

"Uranium poisoning is characterized by generalized health impairment. The element and its compounds produce changes in the kidneys, liver, lungs and cardiovascular, nervous and haemopoietic systems, and cause disorders of protein and carbohydrate metabolism....Chronic poisoning results from prolonged exposure to low concentrations of insoluble compounds and presents a clinical picture different from that of acute poisoning. The outstanding signs and symptoms are pulmonary fibrosis, pneumoconiosis, and blood changes with a fall in red blood count; haemoglobin, erythrocyte and reticulocyte levels in the peripheral blood are reduced. Leucopenia may be observed with leucocyte disorders (cytolysis, pyknosis, and hypersegmentosis). There may be damage to the nervous system. Morphological changes in the lungs, liver, spleen, intestines and other organs and tissues may be found, and it is reported that uranium exposure inhibits reproductive activity and affects uterine and extra-uterine development in experiment al animals. Insoluble compounds tend to be retained in tissues and organs for long periods."

There is more to the article, which you may want to obtain. However it is the most explicit report I have seen, and I find it remarkable for its 1983 copyright, when no one was accepting such data because of the military "need" for uranium!

From the IICPH Resource Centre www.iicph.org
http://www.iicph.org/docs/DU_Poisoning.htm


When they say long term exposure, what they are not saying is that exposure is a lifetime because when those rounds hit they burst into flames and vaporize virtually exploding into a cloud of "nano" sized particles that are small enough to lodge in the mitochondria and once there stay for life literally microwaving the person until they die as alpha radiation literally cooks everything in it path as it radiates.

Worse these guys come home and through sex give it to their wives and gurlfriends!! That is why the wives cannot donate blood either.

Now the really kool thing is what about those who like to bed hop? Now we are getting this shit into our blood supply as there is no way to track this neither are there any effforts being made to do so.

Bottom line if you need to go in for an operation give your own blood!

Oh yeh and dubya was up there preaching that they might hit us with a dirty bomb? Like no shit just sweep up our mess and ship it back here!

Its Ironic that we worry about about the "TERRORISTS" doing back to us precisely what we the nice democracy guys are doing to them is it not?

I sumbit this is mass murder against our own people by what we are led to believe are our own people

Proof that our gov knowingly kills its own people yet to so many 911 is a huge stretch, go figure.

Then the gov trying to keep it quiet no less by mislabeling it as "gulf war syndrome" and blaming anything from sand flies to aliens...and the media cooperating while the public sleeps as usual.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 39 (view)
 
Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/17/2008 9:15:53 PM
.
Most governments when they want to push legislation through that they know people will not accept understand that people will accept it if the gov can show a legitimate reason for doing so.

Like waco and the murrah building, create the problem and offer the solution of more legislation that of course typically removes a few more rights or privileges and giving the government more power, you less power.

If I remember the circumstances correctly not only did the priest write that letter but also I think some kid beat up another gay kid, hence the proof or at least circumstantial evidence that he incited violence with what they labeled hate speech from boison.

It has all the earmarks of a show case imo and the far reaching implications here that borders on thought policing should be an outrage for canadians imo.

It seems to me that the while they are protecting the privileges of gay people they are trampling the privileges of clergy to pratice their religion as they have for centuries past.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 24 (view)
 
Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/17/2008 12:15:26 AM

Do I really need to point out what nonsense this is? Objectivity exists, whether you are capable of it yourself or not.

The question is do I really need to post the definition of "objectivity"?

Pure objectivity means "no opnion", "slant", or taking any kind of position what so ever. Hence what I said; taking a position is "bias".



I've never heard one serious advocate of free speech (of which I am one) claim that this right extends to deliberately vicious and slanderous untruths.


So you claim to be a free speech advocate? Then listen to Hal Lindsay and compare it to this purring pvssy cat Boison!

http://www.halturnershow.com/HTS-06-11-08.mp3

No one is arresting him here in the US.



As for freedom of religion, any religion founded on hate is one we can all live without.


Hate is intense hostility. There is only one religion that I am aware of that professes intense hostility aside from your thugees.



The Thuggee sect is illegal because the practice of it requires murder; nobody has been whining that their freedom of religion was violated.




We all recognize that freedoms must have restrictions when the extreme exercise of them causes recognizable harm, as the Thugee religion did, and as Boisson's letter does. As the old proverb goes, "your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins." Boisson swung too far, and has been justly restricted.


Maybe that is the way it is in Canada but not here in the US. I have the freedom to throw a punch at you. However that freedom ends at the tip of "your" nose. (unless of course we are talking self defense)

Now should that thrown punch break your nose then you would exercize your rights and sue me for violating your rights by assaulting you.

That is how freedom of speech works in America. We dont blame the speaker for what some idiot does on the street.

If that were the case we would have prosecuted dubya for the muslim hate speech, the Evil Ones, where some idiots killed a muslim as a result.

The only restriction on my liberties in the us are when my actions transgress your liberties. That is the line we have drawn in the US.

It seems like there is somehting inherently wrong when a state legislates moral behavior forcing people to into a form of state sanctioned religion.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 23 (view)
 
Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/16/2008 11:48:37 PM


So far, only one person here has even bothered to post elements of the actual letter in the Boisson case and post it - and without that......you have no idea of what you are talking about.

That person also had the sense to correct the totally misleading title of the thread.

I'd like to thank him for that. Great job, Super Steven.



MG, I did not chose the title of the article the author of the article chose the title and I merely put it up as a topic header in which I included the link in the OP and anyone could simply look and see I merely transfered the title. Did you do that?

I did read the boison letter btw and I apologize that I overlooked posting it with everything else.

Where I see a problem with the contention that the title is incorrect appears to be devoid of the consideration of law. If the state forces this priest to "apologize" and the priest does so, it carries the same weight as renouncing, aka admitting his religion is WRONG, hence publically renouncing his beliefs in favor of the state santioned religion of absolute tolerance toward humanism and intolerance to Christianity.

Since I included the site {The Edge} Then the title in both the header and the op I would have thought it plainly obvious that the title was NOT my creation but that of the orignial author who wrote the article?

Would you please explain to me how the title misrepresents the event and would you also please explain to me how the addition of "Headline Reads" changes anything since I thougth it was very clearly and obviously posted in the op?

Now I can understand that someone may not share my opinion and that they may have their own opinion on the matter however I fail to understand the logic in all this title stuff? Since this has drawn the attention of a mod and since you seem to feel you have a good grip on the situation maybe you can shed some light on it for me as to me it seems redundant all things considered?



Homosexual Agenda Wicked

The following is not intended for those who are suffering from an unwanted sexual identity crisis. For you, I have understanding, care, compassion and tolerance. I sympathize with you and offer you my love and fellowship. I prayerfully beseech you to seek help, and I assure you that your present enslavement to homosexuality can be remedied. Many outspoken, former homosexuals are free today.

Instead, this is aimed precisely at every individual that in any way supports the homosexual machine that has been mercilessly gaining ground in our society since the 1960s. I cannot pity you any longer and remain inactive. You have caused far too much damage.

My banner has now been raised and war has been declared so as to defend the precious sanctity of our innocent children and youth, that you so eagerly toil, day and night, to consume. With me stand the greatest weapons that you have encountered to date - God and the "Moral Majority." Know this, we will defeat you, then heal the damage that you have caused. Modern society has become dispassionate to the cause of righteousness. Many people are so apathetic and desensitized today that they cannot even accurately define the term "morality."

The masses have dug in and continue to excuse their failure to stand against horrendous atrocities such as the aggressive propagation of homo- and bisexuality. Inexcusable justifications such as, "I'm just not sure where the truth lies," or "If they don't affect me then I don't care what they do," abound from the lips of the quantifiable majority.

Face the facts, it is affecting you. Like it or not, every professing heterosexual is have their future aggressively chopped at the roots.

Edmund Burke's observation that, "All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing," has been confirmed time and time again. From kindergarten class on, our children, your grandchildren are being strategically targeted, psychologically abused and brainwashed by homosexual and pro-homosexual educators.

Our children are being victimized by repugnant and premeditated strategies, aimed at desensitizing and eventually recruiting our young into their camps. Think about it, children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.

Your children are being warped into believing that same-sex families are acceptable; that men kissing men is appropriate.

Your teenagers are being instructed on how to perform so-called safe same gender oral and anal sex and at the same time being told that it is normal, natural and even productive. Will your child be the next victim that tests homosexuality positive?

Come on people, wake up! It's time to stand together and take whatever steps are necessary to reverse the wickedness that our lethargy has authorized to spawn. Where homosexuality flourishes, all manner of wickedness abounds.

Regardless of what you hear, the militant homosexual agenda isn't rooted in protecting homosexuals from "gay bashing." The agenda is clearly about homosexual activists that include, teachers, politicians, lawyers, Supreme Court judges, and God forbid, even so-called ministers, who are all determined to gain complete equality in our nation and even worse, our world.

Don't allow yourself to be deceived any longer. These activists are not morally upright citizens, concerned about the best interests of our society. They are perverse, self-centered and morally deprived individuals who are spreading their psychological disease into every area of our lives. Homosexual rights activists and those that defend them, are just as immoral as the pedophiles, drug dealers and pimps that plague our communities.

The homosexual agenda is not gaining ground because it is morally backed. It is gaining ground simply because you, Mr. and Mrs. Heterosexual, do nothing to stop it. It is only a matter of time before some of these morally bankrupt individuals such as those involved with NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Lovers Association, will achieve their goal to have sexual relations with children and assert that it is a matter of free choice and claim that we are intolerant bigots not to accept it.

If you are reading this and think that this is alarmist, then I simply ask you this: how bad do things have to become before you will get involved? It's time to start taking back what the enemy has taken from you. The safety and future of our children is at stake.

Rev. Stephen Boissoin

http://ezralevant.com/2008/06/i-feel-like-a-dashing-rogue.html




Yeh thats the evil letter.



Whatever you personally happen to think about homosexuality, whatever robe you hide behind, and whatever cross you bear doesn't give you the right to go around spreading hatred like that towards ANYONE.


Would someone please tell me precisely what is HATE and vitriol in this letter? Does the church get equal time to influence the children as he claims the homosexuals are doing? His letter infers the church does not? If the church does not why should the homosexuals get more time? Just playing devils advocate with the problem.

This really does not sound like HATE, pretty strong I would agree but it sounds more to me like a call to arms for Christians to fight against what he feels is homosexual expansion using whatever means is at their disposal to help in their plight.

I could not find anywhere that he condoned the use of violence in any way fashion or manner or to simply shoot someone to accomplish these ends.

How about some reactions:



Canadian hate speech:
Reactions to bill C-250, mostly by Conservative Christians

See elsewhere for a description of this bill and its passage into law.

Status of bill C-250:

The bill was given royal assent by the Queen's representative in Canada on 2004-APR-29. It took immediate effect. It is now part of the legal code of Canada. Some propaganda directing hatred against persons of any sexual orientation, heterosexuals, homosexuals and/or bisexuals, is now a crime in Canada. Sexual orientation now joins four other groups protected against hate speech on the basis of their "color, race, religion or ethnic origin." 1 However, a "not withstanding" clause allows religiously motivated hate speech.


Initial reactions to the bill:

Sponsor Svend Robinson said that "It's a bill that recognizes that when hate crimes are perpetrated in this country against those who are of a minority religion or race or ethnic origin or color, that Canada says this is wrong." But there's one group in the country and that is gays and lesbians -- the group that has more hate crimes, more violence perpetrated against it -- that isn't included in the hate propaganda laws." 2

The legislation was strongly opposed by religious conservatives. They warned that Christian pastors or Muslim Imams could find themselves in jail if they were to preach that homosexuality is evil or sinful. They suggest that the Bible and/or Qur'an might be confiscated as hate literature. This is most unlikely. The bill contains a "not withstanding" clause which prevents prosecution of individuals for religiously motivated hate speech. Thus, if a person referred to passages in a Bible or any other religious text during the presentation of hate speech, then they could not be prosecuted under the law. Vic Toews of Canada's right-wing party, the Canadian Alliance, said: ''I'm concerned about the chilling effect of this kind of decision.'' 3

Robinson denied that the bill would inhibit normal religious speech when it denigrates gays and lesbians. He told the House of Commons Committee on Justice and Human Rights who was examining the bill: ''There's not an attorney general in the country anywhere at any level who would consent to the prosecution of an individual for quoting from the Bible. An attorney general who tried something like that would be run out of town on a rail.'' 2 He said that the Progressive Conservatives, New Democratic Party and Bloc Québécois members support the bill, but that the extreme right-wing Canadian Alliance does not. He said that the Alliance has "...opposed every equality bill that's come before the House for gays and lesbians."

Inspector David Jones of the Vancouver Police Department told The Canadian Press that he believes being gay puts people at an added risk on the streets. He said: "Sixty-two per cent of the violence is based on sexual orientation. That points to the need to protect these people." Jones also referred to the murder of Aaron Webster, a 41-year-old photographer, who was assumed to be gay and was beaten to death on 2001-NOV-17, in Stanley Park in Vancouver BC. 3

John Fisher, spokesperson for the gay-rights lobby group Egale testified that ''the legislation as it stands, by being under-inclusive, by failing to protect a group equally needing protection, is unconstitutional.'' He suggested that if the law were not changed that the courts would eventually modify the law by reading "sexual orientation" into the legislation as a protected class.

Liberal Justice Minister Martin Cauchon told the House of Commons on 2003-MAY-14 that he supported the bill. It passed through the committee hearing later that month.

Reaction to the bill as it was discussed and passed in Parliament:

bullet Focus on the Family, Canada issued a news release which stated that they "...and the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, among other groups, believe the law may be used to silence those with religious views on the morality of homosexual behaviours. 'We do not condone, in any way, the promotion of hatred against anyone or any group,' said Bruce Clemenger, president of the EFC. 'However, the ambiguity of what this bill will capture may well silence what otherwise would be legitimate public comment on issues of sexual morality'."

bullet The Vancouver Sun reported that bill C-250: "has been described by some Alliance MPs and religious groups as a 'fascist' measure that could criminalize anyone for reading quotes on homosexuality from the Bible or the Koran." 4 The individuals making these comments seem to be either deceitful or misinformed, because, as soon as the bill is given royal assent, there will be two passages in the Criminal Code that specifically allow religious individuals to legally engage in hate propaganda against gays and lesbians.

bullet Brian Rushfeldt of the Canada Family Action Coalition said: "Canadians who are speaking out against the redefinition of marriage are already being accused of 'hate' speech by homosexual activists...When C-250 is passed into law later this fall, the activists will begin to insist on prosecution to silence their critics with criminal sanctions." 4 This also appears to be deceitful or misinformed. Section 308 already contains a passage that protects a person from prosecution if their statements are relevant to any subject of public interest, and if, on reasonable grounds, the person believes them to be true.

bullet Svend Robinson has said that these criticisms are unfounded. "The suggestion that including gays and lesbians in a law that protects against violence and hatred would touch religious beliefs and the right to quote from the Bible is utterly without foundation. What this bill is about is sending a message to the gay bashers, it's about sending a message to those who promote hatred, and violence and even death of gay men." 4

bullet Canadian Alliance Member of Parliament James Moore said: "There's a lot of distrust in general towards the judiciary right now, and it's leading a lot of people to be very fearful of giving powers to the judiciary that aren't necessarily defined specifically with regard to religious tolerance and religious freedom." 4

bullet Leader of the Canadian Alliance, Stephen Harper said that he was "encouraged" by some amendments to the bill, which he feels gives significant protection to religious freedom. But he remains opposed to C-250 because "homosexuality is such an inherently controversial issue there is a danger that this could have, if not tightly defined, very wide implications." 4 This comment may be a reference to a definition of the term "sexual orientation" which is held by some conservative Christians. The vast majority of legislators, gays, lesbians, religious liberals, human sexuality researchers, mental health therapists, etc. define sexual orientation in terms of the sex of the persons to which an individual is sexually attracted. A person is either a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual, depending upon whether they are sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex, same sex, or both sexes. But some Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christians define the term differently. They include pedophilia, necrophilia, hebephilia, incest, and other sexual crimes as additional sexual orientations. Under their definition, protecting persons of all sexual orientations against hate crimes and hate speech would protect sexual criminals from prosecution and criticism.

bullet On 2003-SEP-23, six days after the bill was passed in Parliament, Focus on the Family Canada featured a discussion of C-250 in their "Today's Family News." They mentioned:

bullet Bruce Clemenger, president of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada said that protecting persons of all sexual orientations from hate propaganda is certain to have a "chilling" effect on people of faith. Speaking before the Calgary Evangelical Ministerial Association in Calgary AB, he predicted that the courts will eventually have to rule on where legitimate religious teaching on sexual orientation leaves off and hate propaganda begins. According to the Calgary Herald, Clemenger said: "Whether this law leads to the prosecution of religious groups or not, it's almost certain to have a chilling effect. Will the Gideons still be allowed to place Bibles in motel rooms?"

bullet John McKay, a Liberal member of parliament (MP), calls C-250 the "chill bill...Anybody who has views on homosexuality that differ from Svend Robinson's will be exposed rather dramatically to the joys of the Criminal Code."

bullet Vic Toews, a Canadian Alliance MP and justice critic said that Svend Robinson had put: "the jackboot of fascism on the necks of our people with Bill C-250."
bullet Derek Rogusky, vice-president of family policy for Focus on the Family Canada said on CBC Newsworld that: "We've seen through the courts that when religious freedom comes up against gay rights, that in fact religious freedom tends to be more often than not the loser in those particular cases."

bullet The Family Research Council (FRC) had a short article in their Washington Update news release, titled "Canadians Make Free Speech a Crime." They wrote: "Just north of us in Canada, the parliament passed Bill C-250 last week, making it a crime for anyone to publicly criticize homosexuality. Known as the 'chill bill,' the law makes it illegal to advocate traditional Christian opposition to homosexual sex. The quoting of Scripture will soon be hate speech." 5

Nowhere in the Focus or FRC articles did they mention the two subsections in the bill that give immunity from prosecution to speakers and writers of religiously-based racist, xenophobic, homophobic, and some other forms of hate speech. 6
bullet The 2004-MAY issue of ChristianCurrent discussed the bill. This is a conservative Christian monthly magazine distributed free through churches and conservative Christian book stores. They commented on bill C-250 which they said: "...may make it a crime to read certain Bible passages in public." 7

Reactions to the passing of the bill in the Senate:

As passed, the bill has an escape clause which allows religiously motivated hatred. The text specifies that an individual is immune from prosecution under the act "if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;" However, many conservative Christian leaders are troubled that the act is not sufficiently specific. They feel that the act is vague. A religiously-motivated persons who wants to attack a group -- or advocate genocide against a group -- on the basis of their "color, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation" will not know what the limits of free speech are. Some comments on the day after the bills passage are listed below:

bullet Janet Epp Buckingham, spokesperson for the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, a conservative religious group, said: "This legislation comes at a time when issues of sexual morality and marriage are at the forefront of public debate. Without a clear definition of what is criminal hatred, it is ambiguous what public statements will be considered criminal."

bullet Bruce Clemenger, president of the EFC, said: "While opposing the promotion of hatred against anyone, we are deeply concerned about the chilling effect this legislation may have on the legitimate expression of religious belief. We as a religious community want to ensure that the purpose of prohibiting hate speech does not criminalize the legitimate expression of religious belief, the resulting views of morality nor religious texts."

bullet Justice Critic Vic Toews from the Conservative Party said: "Unfortunately, most Liberals in both the Senate and the House of Commons chose to support an NDP-sponsored law that could put fundamental Canadian freedoms in jeopardy. I am very disappointed in the Liberals' obstruction of Conservative efforts to amend the bill - amendments that that would have protected freedom of religion as well as secular free speech in Canada." (The Conservative party was recently formed as a merger of the Progressive Conservatives and the much larger, extreme right wing Canadian Alliance party.)

bullet Derek Rogusky, spokesperson for Focus on the Family Canada said: "This bill was pushed through Parliament with little public consultation. It's unfortunate that both Senators and MPs rejected the concerns of thousands of Canadians, and ignored the huge flood of correspondence they received about this bill. Canadians are now stuck with this poorly-worded legislation, and it's left to the courts to define what is and what isn't hate propaganda."

bullet The Christian Coalition International (Canada) posted an essay on their web site titled "Fascist anti free speeech hate crimes Bill C-250 receives royal assent and becomes law." They are concerned that anti-gay material published by conservative Christian groups in the U.S. may be classified as hate literature and refused entry into Canada. They wrote: "The hate crime provisions of the Criminal Code are used by the federal postal agency to prohibit importation of materials deemed under the legislation to constitute hate propaganda. With groups like Focus on the Family, Concerned Women for America, and other pro-family groups shipping pro-family materials into Canada the new law also creates concern that the materials may be subject to interception, seizure and forfeiture as 'hate' materials by Canada Post." 8

bullet Dr. Charles McVety, president of Canada Christian College issued a press release. It said, in part: "Paul Martin and his Liberal team adopted Private Member's Bill C-250 and pushed it through the Senate to become law just in time to pave the way for a new election. Now criticism of the redefinition of marriage may be a criminal offense punishable by up to two years in prison." 8

bullet Liberal Senator Anne Cools said that C-250 exposes "millions of Canadians to criminal prosecution who hold moral opinions about sexuality." 8

Subsequent reactions:
bullet During 2004-AUG, R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY discussed a recent conviction of a Swedish pastor for violating that country's hate speech legislation. He said: "The recent expansion of hate crimes laws in Canada, intended to outlaw all criticism of homosexuality, is convincing proof that these trends are not limited to Europe."
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_hat7.htm



So if the Christian religion hates sin and sin is evel and homosexuality is sin can it be said that the bible preaches hate vitriol according to Canadian law and it would seem proper then to burn any books that preach hate and vitriol would it not?

From the Canadian law as I read it the only mistake boison made was not to stick a bible verse in there somewhere? Do you think this is a show ruling?

Here is what wiki calls HATE speech;



Hate speech
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hate speech is a term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color), mental capacity and any other distinction-liability. The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society.


WOW that pretty well wraps it up doesnt it?

degrade? Oh the fun they will have with that!

People best not talk about anything as I think I could make a case for anything that disagrees with me as degrading or intimidating or gender. So critisizing debates will soon come to an end in the name of hate speech?


Remember those things I said before about church and politics ? Remember that detail about collective versus individual rights ? Remember why I said we do not really tolerate excessive vitriol easily ?


No but if you have the link I would like to read it or just tell me why Canada does not have free speech?

I do know that the US being a republic protects the rights of the individual over the rights of the collective.


Let's start by realizing it's no longer 1467, and the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth. Let's start by realizing that your right to free expression starts with the obligation to not spew hatred like that (and it is hatred) , and think you are covered by a robe and a cross - and free speech rights.

The law is the law here . Church and state. There's a wall here between the two here that's rock solid - unlike there. You cannot start to break these apart.

No matter what you happen to think about homosexuals, you cannot create a climate with your words that spreads hatred against them in a public forum. You have to follow the law, just like everyone else, and if you want to change it - start with the procedures in place politically to do such a thing.


So they are not immune if they related it to a bible quote? I thought the code said they were immune if they inserted a bible quote to support it?


You certainly do have the right to believe what you want to believe, privately.


So is this the end of priests and evangialists at the pulpit?


When you cross the line into the public eye - then you must respect the existing law of the land, and not use vitriol. That's something Boisson forgot.


I may be wrong here but I got the impression that the only thing he forgot was to include a bible quote?


Then for you listening pleasure I tapped into the last Hal Lindsay show and to my surprise he mentioned this very ruling...

I am not putting up this radio show and in any way advocating what he says within it but "strictly" as an example of what "free speech" is since it appears many people really do not know.

As much as I complain about this country I lover er and would certainly not change places with my friends to the north.

Now this is "free speech". Only in america where it is an Inalienable "Right"!

http://www.halturnershow.com/HTS-06-11-08.mp3
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 5 (view)
 
Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/16/2008 10:48:40 AM
.


Canada is far ahead of America in terms of being a truly modern Western society. America will reach the post-religious phase as well, but not for another few generations. Let's hear it for Canada.


Well Nero, thankfully I live in the US where we still sort of have a constitution where do not allow our government to legislate against the freedom of religion.

You see in America, we have inalienable "Rights", which means that no government has the authority to remove or violate Our Rights. They can legislate and we will win it back in the courts.

That is the difference. Canadians do not have Rights, they have privileges. Many of them like to think they have rights but they do not; hence they can lawfully legislate against the freedom of speech and/or the freedom of religion and what would otherwise be the lawful expression thereof.

Making boison responsible for general way in which he presented himself would mean that literally all action adventure movies should be banned for the very same reasons.

I am shocked that anyone would advocate sacrificing constitutional Rights to promote whimsical PC.






The first amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Religious aspects

What it says:

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is also the first section of the Bill of Rights. It is arguably the most important part of the U.S. Constitution, as it guarantees freedoms of religion, speech, writing and publishing, peaceful assembly, and the freedom to raise grievances with the Government. In addition, it requires that a wall of separation be maintained between church and state. It reads:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

horizontal rule
Its origins in the Virginia Bill on Religious Freedom

The roots of the First Amendment can be traced to a bill written by Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) in 1777 and proposed to the Virginia Legislature in 1779. 1 It guaranteed freedom of (and from) religion. After an impassioned speech by James Madison, and after some amendments, it became law on 1786-JAN-16. 2

horizontal rule
How the first amendment was written:

In the spring of 1778, the Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia, PA. They resolved three main religious controversies. They:
bullet Decided that there would be no religious test, oath or other requirement for any federal elected office
bullet Allowed Quakers and others to affirm (rather than swear) their oaths of office
bullet Refrained from recognizing the religion of Christianity, or one of its denominations, as an established, state church.

But there was no specific guarantee of religious freedom.

Jefferson was pleased with the constitution, but felt it was incomplete. He pushed for legislation that would guarantee individual rights, including what he felt was the prime guarantee: freedom of and from religion. Madison promised to promote such a bill, in order to gain support for the ratification of the constitution by the State of Virginia. In 1789, the first of ten amendments were written to the constitution; they have since been known as the Bill of Rights.
This essay continues below.

horizontal rule

Sponsored link:

horizontal rule
The text of the First Amendment:

Some early draft amendments to the religion section were:
bullet James Madison, 1789-JUN-7 "The Civil Rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, nor on any pretext infringed. No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases."
bullet House Select Committee, JUL-28 "No religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed,"
bullet Samuel Livermore, AUG-15 "Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience."
bullet House version, AUG-20 "Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience." (Moved by Fisher Ames)
bullet Initial Senate version, SEP-3 "Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
bullet Final Senate version, SEP-9 "Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion."
bullet Conference Committee "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

The final wording was accepted by the House of Representatives on 1789-SEP-24; and by the Senate on 1789-SEP-25. It was ratified by the States in 1791.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/amend_1.htm

 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 4 (view)
 
Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!
Posted: 6/16/2008 10:31:13 AM

This is a clear example of biased reporting. If you read what he said, quoted in the article, there is absolutely nothing "moral" about his opposition.o

It isn't the first time, of course, that hatred, ignorance and bigotry have been the motivation fr spreading lies under the guise of religious "morals." It's encouraging to know that some measures are finally being taken against such people; it is not an unreasonable abridgment of free speech in any modern democracy to forbid slander.

...and speaking of misleading, the title of this thread is just that. The person in question was ordered to stop spreading hate literature, not to renounce his faith. However, it must be noted that for any truly moral person a "faith" which inspires this sort of venomous lies is better renounced than followed.



Come on; anyone that actually takes a POSITION on something is "biased".

The claim of bias is a completely tired and worn out as its well known "tactic" designed do do nothing more than a shutdown constructive criticism on {insert subject}.


There was no HATE speech in boisons letter, if you feel there was by all means find it for us.

This is purely a demonstration of the differences between privileges and Inalienable Rights.

When a government orders someone to cease ANY DISPARAGING REMARKS It violates the very foundations of free speech and in this case the practice of ones religion too. In the final analysis with the rediculous restrictions that the government of canada has placed on boison the end result is that he must succumb to the religion imposed upon him by the state. That is why it is presented in that manner.

Stop All "Disparaging Remarks About Gays and Homosexuals,"

Posted June 10, 2008 | 03:14 PM (EST)

as well as against the university professor and self-described "activis[t] for social justice issues" who filed a complaint against you: That's what the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission ordered Stephen Boisson and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc. to do in Lund v. Boissoin. The Commission had earlier found Boissoin and the Coalition guilty of "causing to be published in the Red Deer Advocate (before the public), a publication in which it was likely to expose homosexuals to hatred or contempt because of their sexual orientation"; I oppose bans on such speech that exposes groups "to hatred or contempt," but at least on their face they seem to be limited to relatively harsh criticisms that tend to arouse hatred or contempt and not mere disagreement or disapproval.

But in reaction to this, the Commission went beyond imposing financial liability for speech likely to arouse hatred or contempt, and ordering that Boissoin stop engaging in speech likely to arouse hatred or contempt. Rather, it expressly ordered that Boissoin apologize, and

That Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc. shall cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals. Further, they shall not and are prohibited from making disparaging remarks in the future about Dr. Lund or Dr. Lund's witnesses relating to their involvement in this complaint. Further, all disparaging remarks versus homosexuals are directed to be removed from current web sites and publications of Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc.

This is a breathtakingly broad prohibition, which extends far beyond the terms of the (already troubling) statute. Boissoin and his group aren't allowed to saying anything "disparaging" about homosexuals, which presumably would even extend to statements such as "homosexuals are acting sinfully" or "The Bible, which I believe should be our moral guide, condemns homosexuality."

Nor can they say anything disparaging (not just anything false or threatening, but anything disparaging) about Prof. Darren E. Lund of the University of Calgary Faculty of Education, a self-described "activis[t]" for "social justice issues in schools and communities," and his witnesses, who include Prof. Kevin Alderson of the University of Calgary, and Douglas Robert Jones, a recently retired Calgary City Police Service officer who has been Liaison to the GLBT Community. I would have thought that activist university professors were proper subjects for discussion, criticism, and even disparagement — but the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission forbids Mr. Boissoin and the Concerned Christian Coalition from engaging in such speech.

Recall that the Supreme Court of Canada originally upheld the Canadian "hate speech" bans precisely because

[T]he phrase 'hatred or contempt', are sufficiently precise and narrow to limit its impact to those expressive activities which are repugnant to Parliament's objective. The phrase 'hatred or contempt' in the context of s. 13(1) refers only to unusually strong and deep felt emotions of detestation, calumny and vilification and, as long as human rights tribunals continue to be well aware of the purpose of s. 13(1) and pay heed to the ardent and extreme nature of feeling described in that phrase, there is little danger that subjective opinion as to offensiveness will supplant the proper meaning of the section.

Well, it looks like the Alberta Human Rights Commission is no longer "pay[ing] heed" to the limits imposed by the law. Unfortunate — but not surprising.

More on Huffington Post...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eugene-volokh/stop-all-disparaging-rema_b_106360.html
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 1 (view)
 
Headline Reads "Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith!"
Posted: 6/16/2008 8:35:17 AM
.

This is freedom of speech in Canada?



The Edge

Canada Orders Pastor to Renounce His Faith

June 9th, 2008 by Pete Vere, JCL ·Print ·ShareThis

In a decision that foreshadows the possible fate of Fr. Alphonse de Valk, Canada’s leading pro-life voice among Catholic clergy, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal has forbidden evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson from expressing his moral opposition to homosexuality. The tribunal also ordered Boisson to pay $5,000 “damages for pain and suffering” and apologize to the “human rights” activist who filed the complaint.

The complaint stems from Canada’s debate leading up to state legislation recognizing so-called same-sex marriage. In 2002, the pastor wrote a letter to the editor of his local newspaper in which he denounced the homosexual agenda as “wicked” and stated that: “Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.”

The activist subsequently filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission — a quasi-judicial body that investigates alleged discrimination within the Canadian province. The government tribunal published its decision

[http://albertahumanrights.ab.ca/Lund_Darren_Remedy053008.pdf] on May 30.

While agreeing that Boisson’s letter was not a criminal act,
the government tribunal nevertheless ordered the Christian pastor to “cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals.” Moreover, the tribunal’s decision “prohibited [Boisson] from making disparaging remarks in the future” about the activist who filed the complaint and witnesses who supported the complaint. Many of Canada’s religious leaders and civil libertarians have expressed concern that the government’s human rights tribunals are interpreting any criticism of homosexual activism as ‘disparaging’.

The tribunal also ordered Boisson to provide the complainant with a written apology for his letter to the editor. This last requirement threatens civil liberties in Canada, said Ezra Levant, a Jewish-Canadian author and lawyer. Levant, himself the target of an Alberta Human Rights Commission investigation, is facing the possibility the state may order him to apologize as well.

“Ed Stelmach’s ‘conservative’ government now believes that if it can’t convince a Christian pastor that he’s wrong, it will just order him to condemn himself?”
Levant wrote on his blog. “Other than tribunals in Stalin’s Soviet Union and Mao’s China, where is this Orwellian ‘order’ considered to be justice?”

“This is like a Third World jail-house confession — where accused criminals are forced to sign false statements of guilt,” Levant wrote. “We don’t even ‘order’ murderers to apologize to their victims’ families. Because we know that a forced apology is meaningless. But not if your point is to degrade Christian pastors.”

In essence, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal is ordering to the minister to renounce his Christian faith, since his opposition to homosexuality is based upon the Judeo-Christian Bible.
The case against Pastor Boisson has been watched closely by practicing Catholics in the country, especially as news spreads about the current Canadian Human Rights Commission investigation into Fr. de Valk reported on in this space last Wednesday. The Basilian priest and publisher of Catholic Insight magazine stands accused of promoting “extreme hatred and contempt” against homosexuals for having publicly defended the Church’s traditional definition of marriage. Some of the allegedly hateful statements are quotations from the Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Fr. de Valk told Catholic Exchange.

Although Catholic moral teaching is generally more nuanced in its criticism of homosexuality, evangelicals and fundamentalist Protestants often appear to be used as test cases for the government commissions before targeting Catholics. Thus many Catholics fear the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal will attempt to use the Boisson case to muzzle Fr. de Valk from expressing the Church’s traditional moral teaching, delivering a further blow to religious liberty and freedom of conscience in Canada.

http://www.catholicexchange.com/2008/06/09/112825/

 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Wiretapping: Impeachment Not Immunity- who wants it deleted?
Posted: 6/15/2008 4:04:47 PM
I agree. I am neither a dem or rep and this has nothing to do with party affiliation.

It has everything to do with THEM BREAKING THE LAW and putting a stop to it.

They will try to run it through several times I am sure, they alway do just like immigration. If the people put up a fuss they leave it lay for a while and try to sneak it through just like the amnesty for illegals.

Thats why we have to keep an eye on these crooks and bust them on the rare occasions we can!

We are accountible for any crime we commit hence they should be too and the only way to enforce that is to write your reps.

Thankfully I got this info in time to get my 2 cents worth in which is hang anyone that would violate my constitutional rights from the highest tree!!

end of rant
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Wiretapping: Impeachment Not Immunity
Posted: 6/15/2008 3:17:36 PM
.
who wantes this deleted the "oh I have nothign to hide crowd"?

I thought this was a politics group. How many people knew about this before I posted it?

Yeh delete this and dont say anything, I will start a bill to have HLS assigned to everyones home just before I move out of the country Shees!

You get what you deserve!
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 1 (view)
 
Wiretapping: Impeachment Not Immunity
Posted: 6/15/2008 2:56:36 PM
.

Lets be heard people! This is timely and only takes a couple seconds!

Wiretapping: Impeachment Not Immunity

House "Majority" Leader Steny Hoyer doesn't understand the meaning of NO.

On March 14, we won a huge victory when the House voted 213-197 for a bill to strengthen FISA without providing immunity for Bush and the telcos who illegally spied on millions of Americans without a warrant. Thanks to your lobbying efforts - including over 58,000 petitions! - just six Bush Democrats voted for immunity.

Even Steny Hoyer voted against immunity. But Hoyer kept conspiring with Bush to sneak immunity through Congress when no one was watching. And on Friday, Hoyer quietly announced a new bill to provide retroactive immunity for past warrantless wiretapping and allow new wiretapping for six more years.

So it's time for us to tell Congress once again that we will not tolerate warrantless wiretapping by George Bush or any other President, and we demand full accountability for George Bush through impeachment. Our last wiretapping petition sent over 58,000 emails to Congress - let's see if we can double that number to over 100,000.

Wiretapping: Impeachment Not Immunity - Sign the Petition
http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/141

Discuss this with Democrats.com members here:
http://www.democrats.com/wiretapping-impeachment-not-immunity
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
California Same-Sex Marriage: How will it affect other states?
Posted: 6/15/2008 9:10:22 AM
.
Oh I gotta make a HUGE bowl of popcorn for this show!

I cant wait to see the marriages created in CA and divorces in their home States!
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Bright side to peak oil
Posted: 6/14/2008 6:15:45 PM
.
we havent reached peak oil by a long shot. Just peak profits.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 10 (view)
 
there is NO stopping global warming
Posted: 6/13/2008 8:47:55 AM
.
me me me, I know I know!

How about if we blow up the sun!
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 10 (view)
 
So you think universal health care is good for America huh?
Posted: 6/13/2008 6:03:54 AM
.
Corporations for 200,

Because its profit based?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 9 (view)
 
So you think universal health care is good for America huh?
Posted: 6/13/2008 5:33:41 AM

The question is simply this: do you believe that a fellow human being had a fundamental right to medical care if they're sick or injured regardless of whether they can pay for it? Yes. Or no.


No not any more than they have the fundamental right to be fed, or clothed, or housed, or given a new tv.

They do have the right to provide for themselves. Maybe if we the ones who have to foot the bill have the fundamental right to stop them from producing, migrating and if we have the fundamental right to put them to work to offset the costs of our tax bills then sure we can give them the fundamental right to free health care and a new tv set.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 7 (view)
 
So you think universal health care is good for America huh?
Posted: 6/13/2008 12:22:29 AM
.
Another problem is why should healthy me pay for anyone elses freaking health care? In my family ya live till your 80 - 90++ and drop dead. Now I am supposed to pay in for 70 years of my life for everyone else?

Most federal taxes in this country are not mandatory and many people know this, getting a universal health care package set up in this country would force taxes on those who otherwise did not need to pay. Thankfully they are voters too.

Listen to the vids in the op and look how the feds dont give a rats ass about the states as it is, look at all the hospitals going bankrupt and people really think we should authorize them to collect for UHC? Shit, instead of leaving the boarders open they would start free touring trips and start boating people in, at tax payer expense of course.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 4 (view)
 
Habeas corpus 3 Bush Administration - 0
Posted: 6/12/2008 8:11:22 PM

Guantanamo inmates 'have rights'

The court said the detainees "have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus".


Oh yeh....

I hate to split hairs here but they are 1/2 right.

They do not have "Rights" as in "Inalienable Rights" as in the same as I do. They have privileges granted to them on behalf of the federal government which is similar to canada, which is privileges given can be taken away.

So while it is very similar it does not carry the force as an inalienable right which no government can take away or deny under any circumstances. (Lawfully)
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 32 (view)
 
Ex Presidents
Posted: 6/12/2008 7:18:28 PM
.

Why do republicans seem content with doing their job and democrats want to go out and become rock stars ?

probably because nixon reagan and ford are all dead :)
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 4 (view)
 
So you think universal health care is good for America huh?
Posted: 6/12/2008 7:08:33 PM

What your country should be doing - and I've said this a million times - is crack down on those crooked health insurance companies. They're given far too much leeway to deny coverage and it has to stop. Otherwise, what the hell are you paying for?

However, if your insurance companies were given a hefty kick in the ass, your healthcare would indeed be world class. Instead, if I'm not mistaken, you're somewhere in the 40's.


I couldnt agree more with this!

Insurance should be regulated. When I was a child back in ancient times health care did not break the bank and my father was the sole supporter of the family.

Then the government got involved.

Since they are involved and we are stuck with insurance and ludicrious bills and can no longer just pay out of pocket like my father did, then we need to both regulate insurance providers and also disallow previous conditions to change the price tag etc.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
How Can I tell if my post has been deleted.
Posted: 6/12/2008 6:35:04 PM
ok thanks, seems my browser temp files got blasted. wierd.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 1 (view)
 
How Can I tell if my post has been deleted.
Posted: 6/12/2008 6:13:29 PM
how can I tell if a post of mine has been deleted? I swear I posted to a thread today in the roe v wade thread and it disappeard. I need to know if I am losing my mind here?
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Habeas corpus 3 Bush Administration - 0
Posted: 6/12/2008 2:21:41 PM

Some 270 men are held at the US naval base, on suspicion of terrorism or links to al-Qaeda and the Taleban.


reminds me of a "driving to fast for conditions" ticket on steroids

Nothing more than a we will hold you on a pejorative until we find somehting to charge you with.

Pre-emptive detainment, no reason required, (we will find one someday).

that word terrorism should be stricken from anything what so ever to do with law.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 3 (view)
 
So you think universal health care is good for America huh?
Posted: 6/12/2008 2:00:11 PM
.
Now there is a thought.

We can just ship all our illegal aliens sucking our health care dry up to canada then we can see how long they will brag about how cheap their health care is

I love it when people put down utube... utube rocks and those that put it down ususally do so because the info within alwqays goes against them and shows them to be wrong. to bad so sad!
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 1 (view)
 
So you think universal health care is good for America huh?
Posted: 6/11/2008 5:40:48 PM
.
Testimony (anti illegal) "51 Florida Hospitals in trouble"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDjZ6gzo0C4

Testimony of illegal alien care from 1 Florida hospital
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLJxmJZXgNI

No need to editorialize. Here is a sampling of the sort of facts the politicians and pro-illegal lobby want you to ignore, yet expect you to continue to bear the burden of. Is it any wonder scores of hospitals in border states and elsewhere have shut down or closed their ER units?!

I think hospitals should require birth certs before allowing anyone into er thanks to our federal government pushing the north american union, then turn right around and sue the feds for failure to enforce existing immigration laws. When people start dying in the streets then it might get their attention.

I hope everyone on the border states write their reps and demand compensation.

Just imagine if this were being fed from the federal trough via the universal health agenda effectively removing the states power to do anything about it?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 1 (view)
 
Screwed again!
Posted: 6/11/2008 9:17:18 AM
.

Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Monday, 9 June 2008

There is more than twice as much oil in the ground as major producers say, according to a former industry adviser who claims there is widespread misunderstanding of the way proven reserves are calculated.

Listen to Dr Pike's explanation on how they did it here;
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/oil-shortage-a-myth-says-industry-insider-842778.html
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 20 (view)
 
A terrorist fist jab?
Posted: 6/7/2008 1:59:23 PM

So on the basis of the peace symbol, the peace movement in the 60's was actually in support of the anti-christ?


Were you addressing me?

I never said or implied that the 60's "peace" movement was any kind of antichrist movement, or in any way "overtly/consciously" supported an antichrist movement.

I limited what I said specifically to the symbol did I not?
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 11 (view)
 
A terrorist fist jab?
Posted: 6/7/2008 12:58:02 PM

Antichrist...pfft what utter codswallop.


Well I suppose if your knowledge of symbology is severely challenged and only dates as far back as russel then you may actually have a point. Most everyone else would disagree.

pad correctly stated and summed up the most significant part of the meaning.

I suppose I can fly a flag with a swasitika on it, then tell you its for love and you would believe that too?

Peace symbols are traditionally doves, doves carrying olive branches etc.

the moral of the story is "use the correct symbol to carry your message" rather than bury it in a secondary message.



It's actually pretty amusing watching some of these posters drift further and further into madness.


Thats great! Then we are both having fun. I always enjoy watching some of these posters drift further and further into utter ignorance.

.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 5 (view)
 
A terrorist fist jab?
Posted: 6/7/2008 12:32:29 PM

Just as the 'peace sign' is associated with the 1960s, etc. etc and it's difficult to take those type of 'displays' from their origins.


yeh some of the hippies were not to bright.

The peace sign is an upside down cross with broken arms within a circle. Any idea who or what that really represents? :)
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 4 (view)
 
A terrorist fist jab?
Posted: 6/7/2008 12:30:23 PM
.
funny, no one paid attention to the bush sig heil gesture, or the many brotherhood gestures he made.

They all suggested that it was nothing more than a figment of paranoia.

I would suggest this is the same.
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 17 (view)
 
It's official - Bush BS'd us into Iraq
Posted: 6/7/2008 11:25:14 AM

So, I feel there should be a new law that allows for the people's opinion of the president to be enough to files the articles of impeachment whenever his approval rating drop below 33%..


There are some people who feel that there shouls be a 4th branch of government comprised of people from every county of this nation to oversee,regulate and be the watchdogs of the other 3 branches.

Isnt that a novel idea :)
.
 NwMke
Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 16 (view)
 
It's official - Bush BS'd us into Iraq
Posted: 6/7/2008 11:18:30 AM

trapper jon md
you lefties would rather we were attacked again? that more people died? because all you care about is WINNING?



U.S. Department of Defense

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) News Transcript

Presenter: Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld October 12, 2001

Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Parade Magazine (Interview with Lyric Wallwork Winik, Parade Magazine)



Rumsfeld: There were lots of warnings.

Rumsfeld: Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the MISSLE to damage this building and SIMILAR (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center.


http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=3845



So trapper are you like incapable of understanding what rummy said here?


What more does it take to prove to you that we were attacked by neocons and the muslims are the patsies?

Its all about lies and a great drama given for the publics entertainment.

righties lefties it does not matter, our government is NOT ours, it belongs to "them" and we are the debt slaves. .
.
 
Show ALL Forums