On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
The ICC and the world court have a track record that resembles
the lowest common demoninator of the governments that sponsor
it - They support tyrrany, terror, and slavery, and shattering
confiscation of property.
Agreed.
For all that is wrong
--
James A. Donald
For all that is wrong with the US government, remember the
condition of people under the great majority of the
world's governments: poverty and fear, where the political
privilege of a few shatters the economy and forces the vast
majority into poverty, for
--
Adam:
This brings up thoughts of prior debates on whether or not US
citizens are subject to the International Court. We (the US)
are making a habit of forcing our laws on other countries,
but yet we are not subject to the laws of an established
INTERNATIONAL court; one who's laws
This brings up thoughts of prior debates on whether or not US citizens
are subject to the International Court. We (the US) are making a habit
of forcing our laws on other countries, but yet we are not subject to
the laws of an established INTERNATIONAL court; one who's laws are
created from a
The problem is, of course, that the US simply cannot keep their dicks
out of the affairs of other countries. We are obsessed with controlling
how the world develops, so as to guarantee to force countries to evolve
in such a way that is beneficial to the US. Such is an inevitable hazard
of becoming
--
James A. Donald wrote:
... but Bin Laden's indictment not only mentions US
troops in Saudi Arabia, but also the reconquest of
Spain, the massacre committed by the crusaders in
Jerusalem, and the failure of Americans to obey
Shariah law.
J.A. Terranson
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
James A. Donald wrote:
... but Bin Laden's indictment not only mentions US troops
in Saudi Arabia, but also the reconquest of Spain, the
massacre committed by the crusaders in Jerusalem, and the
failure of Americans to obey Shariah law.
At 11:25 AM 10/19/2004, Dave Howe wrote:
TBH the UK *did* have a major terrorist threat for decades -
because we were dicking around in *their* country :)
Do you mean the terrorists who raised their funding in
bars in Boston and San Francisco? They haven't been
doing much active terror lately,
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
James A. Donald wrote:
... but Bin Laden's indictment not only mentions US
troops in Saudi Arabia, but also the reconquest of
Spain, the massacre committed by the crusaders in
Jerusalem, and the failure of Americans to obey
--
James A. Donald wrote:
... but Bin Laden's indictment not only mentions US troops
in Saudi Arabia, but also the reconquest of Spain, the
massacre committed by the crusaders in Jerusalem, and the
failure of Americans to obey Shariah law.
J.A. Terranson
Whats good for the goose
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
... but Bin Laden's indictment
not only mentions US troops in Saudi Arabia, but also the
reconquest of Spain, the massacre committed by the crusaders in
Jerusalem, and the failure of Americans to obey Shariah law.
Whats good for the goose is good
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
James A. Donald wrote:
... but Bin Laden's indictment not only mentions US
troops in Saudi Arabia, but also the reconquest of
Spain, the massacre committed by the crusaders in
Jerusalem, and the failure of Americans to obey Shariah
--
James A. Donald wrote:
... but Bin Laden's indictment not only mentions US
troops in Saudi Arabia, but also the reconquest of
Spain, the massacre committed by the crusaders in
Jerusalem, and the failure of Americans to obey Shariah
law.
J.A. Terranson
Whats good for
Tyler Durden wrote:
So. Why don't we see terrorist attacks in Sweden, or Switzerland, or
Belgium or any other country that doesn't have any military or
Imperliast presence in the middle east? Is this merely a coincidence?
What I strongly suspect is that if we were not dickin' around over there
--
James A. Donald:
War is dangerous to freedom, but we do not have a choice of
peace. The question is where the war is to be fought - in
America, or elsewhere. War within America will surely
destroy freedom.
Tyler Durden wrote:
So. Why don't we see terrorist attacks in Sweden,
On Wednesday, March 5, 2003, at 10:51 AM, Ed Norton wrote:
Someone should go into that same mall with Support the War in Iraq
T-shirts to see if they also get thrown out.
What pisses me off is that its probably just some powerless little pion
When I said that high-Z cosmic rays produce showers
From the article, New York Civil Liberties Union President Stephen
Gottlieb says, We believe, most of us, in the Bill of Rights, and we
believe that protects the freedom to speak. How is Constitutionally-
protected freedom of speech imperiled when an agent of a private
corporation asks
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 07:13:15PM -0600, Neil Johnson wrote:
Evidently the Coke people were smart enough not to make a big stink.
Olympic ideals, my foot.
Right. A lawyer who lives around the corner from me worked as a volunteer
at at least one Olympics as an IP enforcer. Any people wearing
The Smoking Gun has the complaint and police reports up:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/crossgates1.html
It wasn't the T-shirts. They were proselytizing other
customers. Allegations of verbal disputes. Discourages shopping. LLOYD
CORP. v. TANNER, 407 U.S. 551 (1972)
Right. A lawyer who lives around the corner from me worked as a
volunteer at at least one Olympics as an IP enforcer. Any people wearing
shirts or sweatshirts or jackets with trademarks on them that were not
Olympic sponsors got kicked out of the event.
Your RaHoWa mate,Tim 'Mongo' May, loves
Apparently Give peace a chance is dangerous, subversive speech, not to be
tolerated in polite company
http://www.msnbc.com/local/wnyt/m276307.asp?0ct=-302cp1=1
On Tuesday 04 March 2003 21:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apparently Give peace a chance is dangerous, subversive speech, not
to be tolerated in polite company
http://www.msnbc.com/local/wnyt/m276307.asp?0ct=-302cp1=1
From the article, New York Civil Liberties Union President Stephen
Gottlieb
oppose the war, but if TV convinces the
pion that the war is supported by Americans, then an anti-war stance is now
labeled controversial.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Give peace a chance?
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:08:39 -0500
Apparently Give peace a chance
23 matches
Mail list logo
