| 15th November 2006 07:18 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
I have to say fuck you Corky...
Feej...expressing his intellect in the way he knows best....
|
| 15th November 2006 07:20 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
quote:
robpop wrote:
Go to hell scumbags.
Hell's too good for the geeks...
|
| 15th November 2006 07:33 PM |
|
|
| robpop |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
Hell's too good for the geeks...
You are right. Go to fucking Iraq then to fight your president's war for whatever the reason for the war is this week. |
| 15th November 2006 07:38 PM |
|
|
| SheRat |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
I do criminal defense work. The rights of our people, as secured by the Founding Fathers after hard experience with occupiers, were enumerated in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. The interpretation of those rights, particularly as it relates to the Fourth Amendment ('the right of the people to be free from unreasonable search and seizure....and no warrant shall issue except upon...') is what has kept this once-great Nation from slipping into a police state as the Bush geeks wish. These rights have been steadily eroded with every great "moral" drive that pleases these geeks. Prohibition, the 'War on Drugs', anti-porn drives....all lead to law enforcement over-reaching as these issues frequently take place behind closed doors. And these Bush geeks wish to pry into ALL of our doors. And to think that this will only apply to criminals or 'terrorists', is to ignore history. At your peril. As do the Bush geeks. So the geeks have sought to make the police lazy and get away with violating fundamental American rights rather than insisting on and enforcing law enforcement's compliance with the Law. Typical. So I come into the picture representing some poor schmuck caught with a joint in some highway stop only because John Q. Cop decided to not waste time and get a warrant and instead searches a locked glove compartment. Under the judges who used to respect this Nation's citizenry, under judges who used not to kowtow before the religious loonies and their geek supporters, the results of such a search would be easy to suppress. Now the loony judges look for ways to keep the joint in evidence. And the result may be criminal sanctions versus my client. That is only one of dozens of annual examples with which I deal.
I guess I was asking why the new boss isn't the same as the old boss...
I guess you are saying that you've noticed a marked difference in judges' attitudes post-Bush.
Still, I believe Nellcote was saying the Dems' regime is not going to be any different than the Bush regime.
I could be wrong though about what Nellcote was saying, however.
|
| 15th November 2006 08:09 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
well, I am pointing out that the new boss versus the old boss means the difference between a criminal record or not for millions of Americans....that is worth voting for... |
| 15th November 2006 08:13 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
well, I am pointing out that the new boss versus the old boss means the difference between a criminal record or not for millions of Americans....that is worth voting for...
Millions?...you should be real busy...but be honest...how many crminals are you defending that were the sole result of the people who should not have been elected?...as I politely said in the first place...I think you're overstating the whole thing...why? |
| 15th November 2006 08:19 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
SheRat wrote:
Ah, sorry...I'm not familiar with what is obviously an established lexicon...;-)
I guess my meandering about eggs and vaginas, etc. was extra pointless and indulgent then.
My apologies.
[Edited by SheRat]
I wasn't saying that at all, SR - I was agreeing with you that non-estro-dispensing pharmacists probably do know how the pill works, and their objection to it, while insane, is at least consistent/principled.
Bush Geeks flounder around in whatever topic the media tells thems is currently hot, without ever realizing how inconsistent they are on a daily basis. Its a way of thinking I though most adults grew out of in high school if not earlier - I was wrong.
I didn't have anything to say regarding your comments on eggs and vaginas. |
| 15th November 2006 08:26 PM |
|
|
| TampabayStone |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
I didn't have anything to say regarding your comments on eggs and vaginas.
 |
| 15th November 2006 08:28 PM |
|
|
| Maxlugar |
Donald Rummsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz have a lot of time on their hands now.
You Anti-Bush Tards and Uber Conservatives are dead meat!
Hail Bush!
Hail HiM! HAIL HIM!!! |
| 15th November 2006 08:43 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
Maxlugar wrote:
Donald Rummsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz have a lot of time on their hands now.
You Anti-Bush Tards and Uber Conservatives are dead meat!
Hail Bush!
Hail HiM! HAIL HIM!!!
One of those guys is a victim of loyalty to George Walker Bush III, the other is an un-American Zionist who will never scare anyone. Why don't you get this stuff? All you have to do is step back a bit, and drink more.
And why Hail anyone, especially a person who is clearly retarded? Some human beings are just way better than other - Jagger, Churchill, Attucks, Darwin, Yossarian, Einstein, Bird, Bugliosi - but why even hail them superiosities - they make plenty of mistakes.
Anyway, shouldn't it be Hail "Dubya" just to stay in character? Hail Bush reeks of flitness. |
| 15th November 2006 08:45 PM |
|
|
| robpop |
It is just like Winslow and his Browns shit. Just a cheerleader refusing to see the truth that his team sucks. |
| 15th November 2006 08:50 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
Hail Yossarian
|
| 15th November 2006 08:51 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
One of those guys is a victim of loyalty to George Walker Bush III, the other is an un-American Zionist who will never scare anyone. Why don't you get this stuff? All you have to do is step back a bit, and drink more.
And why Hail anyone, especially a person who is clearly retarded? Some human beings are just way better than other - Jagger, Churchill, Attucks, Darwin, Yossarian, Einstein, Bird, Bugliosi - but why even hail them superiosities - they make plenty of mistakes.
Anyway, shouldn't it be Hail "Dubya" just to stay in character? Hail Bush reeks of flitness.
You should hail me...I'm right 95% of the time and I can get you real, in the know, Steelers gear...not that Footlocker crap |
| 15th November 2006 09:07 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
You should hail me...I'm right 95% of the time and I can get you real, in the know, Steelers gear...not that Footlocker crap
I seldom hit 95% righteousness rate. I have to be blitzed to get that good. |
| 15th November 2006 09:54 PM |
|
|
| robpop |
Moonie,
Are you still talking to God? I tried to talk to him today, but I think he is still pissed off at me about my "may your God fuck you in the ass" comment I made under the influence of a mix of nyquil and Jim Beam last night. If so ask him if I should go to CLeveland Sunday, or go to a huge bash up in the mountains this weekend. This is a matter of life and death.
None the less, the mix of Beam and Nyquil knocked me out for 14 hours and I woke up felling better than ever. Best flu remedy ever. No quack doctor would ever prescribe that.
[Edited by robpop]
[Edited by robpop] |
| 15th November 2006 10:07 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
robpop wrote:
Moonie,
Are you still talking to God? I tried to talk to him today, but I think he is still pissed off at me about my "may your God fuck you in the ass" comment I made under the influence of a mix of nyquil and Jim Beam last night. If so ask him if I should go to CLeveland Sunday, or go to a huge bash up in the mountains this weekend. This is a matter of life and death.
None the less, the mix of Beam and Nyquil knocked me out for 14 hours and I woke up felling better than ever. Best flu remedy ever. No quack doctor would ever prescribe that.
[Edited by robpop]
[Edited by robpop]
I gotta try this Nyq-Beam dealie. I drank a bottle of Listerine once - swear to god.
Dude, don't worry about god, if he truly is talking to George Walker Bush III (frankly, I think our President was lying his ass off when he said that), then like I said, its god's judgment that is in question, not your own. And I'm telling you to get up to Cleveland - WinslownStud needs to get a beer dumped on his head like real bad and stuff. |
| 15th November 2006 10:39 PM |
|
|
| robpop |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
I gotta try this Nyq-Beam dealie. I drank a bottle of Listerine once - swear to god.
Dude, don't worry about god, if he truly is talking to George Walker Bush III (frankly, I think our President was lying his ass off when he said that), then like I said, its god's judgment that is in question, not your own. And I'm telling you to get up to Cleveland - WinslownStud needs to get a beer dumped on his head like real bad and stuff.
I'll dump a fucking Black Label on his head, no way I am wasting a Mon River Iron City on him.
Bushie was not lying when he talked to God, After all is not Dick Chaney God?
Dude, I may be the eternal optimist, but I think we can still pull this off. My Weegie Thompson avaitar told me so. You know how it is when you are not used to losing.
[Edited by robpop] |
| 15th November 2006 11:11 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
robpop wrote:
I'll dump a fucking Black Label on his head, no way I am wasting a Mon River Iron City on him.
Bushie was not lying when he talked to God, After all is not Dick Chaney God?
Dude, I may be the eternal optimist, but I think we can still pull this off. My Weegie Thompson avaitar told me so. You know how it is when you are not used to losing.
[Edited by robpop]
We got this one.
Check Ben, he's moving on, he's shaking, he's taking names. Things are looking up - they will be top 3 teams in football come end of season - just hope they make playoffs.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06318/738188-66.stm |
| 16th November 2006 12:04 AM |
|
|
| Barney Fife |
quote:
StarvinMarvin wrote:
I can't believe that he wasn't impeached on the spot, let alone given an opportunity to run in the 2004 election. Unbelievable.
I can't believe Hillicunt thinks it would be legal for herself to be president again. Hell, four years was way too much - let alone eight! |
| 16th November 2006 01:57 AM |
|
|
| killerbitch |
Did anyone read the Rolling Stones magazine's article on Congress? It was out
about a month or so ago. Incredibly despicable, and terrifying. |
| 16th November 2006 10:38 AM |
|
|
| Jumping Jack |
Gotta love watching the Dems fight each other. Pelosi is already making enemies by trying to push Murtha. Let the mud wrestling games begin! |
| 16th November 2006 12:40 PM |
|
|
| SheRat |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
I wasn't saying that at all, SR - I was agreeing with you that non-estro-dispensing pharmacists probably do know how the pill works, and their objection to it, while insane, is at least consistent/principled.
Bush Geeks flounder around in whatever topic the media tells thems is currently hot, without ever realizing how inconsistent they are on a daily basis. Its a way of thinking I though most adults grew out of in high school if not earlier - I was wrong.
I didn't have anything to say regarding your comments on eggs and vaginas.
why is everyone so sensitive?
I wasn't stamping off in a huff. I was just making a joke about how my off-topic musings on vaginas and eggs was extra special not relevant if this thread is about Bush Geeks, who are different from the religious whackjobs, about whom the musings re: vaginas and eggs would have been relevant.
|
| 16th November 2006 01:08 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
SheRat wrote:
why is everyone so sensitive?
Agreed my Stonesian Queen .
I believe we all need to chill out and stare at THIS for the next twenty - four hours solid :
|
|
|
V
|
| 16th November 2006 01:53 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
killerbitch wrote:
Did anyone read the Rolling Stones magazine's article on Congress? It was out
about a month or so ago. Incredibly despicable, and terrifying.
LOL!!! Yeah,that's it. I'll get all my political news from a magazine that clearly has an agenda and a huge axe to grind with any and all Republicans! Geeesh! Try finding one negative article about Dems in that shit rag magazine! They only listed William Jefferson(D-La) as the one corrupt Dem!! That's only because he was caught redhanded by the FBI with $90,0000 in a freezer in his Senate office! Funny thing is that the Dem party is now about to give him another posistion of leadership!!!! Bet you didn't read that in that shit fucking magazine,did ya? Did you read about Harry Reid's massive corruption story?!?! The DLM buried that one! So too with Pelosi's corrupt Cali vinyards! I guess Rolling Stone has an agenda? Ya think? Ain't it funny how the Republican leadership always resigns at the first hint of improprity yet the Dems seem to excuse themselves of all corruption and offer promotions?! Here's a goddamned clue. Read another magazine for your political information. One that does not clearly suck the cock of the Dem party
Riffy |
| 16th November 2006 02:43 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
LOL!!! Yeah,that's it. I'll get all my political news from a magazine that clearly has an agenda and a huge axe to grind with any and all Republicans! Geeesh! Try finding one negative article about Dems in that shit rag magazine! They only listed William Jefferson(D-La) as the one corrupt Dem!! That's only because he was caught redhanded by the FBI with $90,0000 in a freezer in his Senate office! Funny thing is that the Dem party is now about to give him another posistion of leadership!!!! Bet you didn't read that in that shit fucking magazine,did ya? Did you read about Harry Reid's massive corruption story?!?! The DLM buried that one! So too with Pelosi's corrupt Cali vinyards! I guess Rolling Stone has an agenda? Ya think? Ain't it funny how the Republican leadership always resigns at the first hint of improprity yet the Dems seem to excuse themselves of all corruption and offer promotions?! Here's a goddamned clue. Read another magazine for your political information. One that does not clearly suck the cock of the Dem party
Two words....IRAN-CONTRA.
|
| 16th November 2006 02:52 PM |
|
|
| Dan |
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
Two words....IRAN-CONTRA.
Most Republicans don't have a problem with it and therefore don't see it as a real scandal. Pretty much like all other Republican scandals. Go figure. |
| 16th November 2006 03:08 PM |
|
|
| robpop |
big fucking joke.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRBAyVREGG0
U.S. Deaths Confirmed By The DoD: 2851
Reported U.S. Deaths Pending DoD Confirmation: 12
Total 2863
We who are against Bush are made out to be unpatriotic, and against our brave soliders in Iraq.
After watching that video who is unpatriotic and against our soliders in Iraq.
[Edited by robpop] |
| 16th November 2006 03:12 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
quote:
Dan wrote:
Most Republicans don't have a problem with it and therefore don't see it as a real scandal. Pretty much like all other Republican scandals. Go figure.
Go figure what? republicans are less corrupt than democrats? Of course some republicans don't consider Iran-Contra a real scandal because they're so blinded by partisan politics their conscience is turned off.
[Edited by Ten Thousand Motels] |
| 16th November 2006 03:19 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
Lockerbie trial was a CIA fix, US intelligence insider claims
By Liam McDougall, Home Affairs Editor
Sunday Herald
THE CIA manipulated the Lockerbie trial and lied about the strength of the prosecution case to get a result that was politically convenient for America, according to a former US State Department lawyer.
Michael Scharf, who was the counsel to the US counter-terrorism bureau when the two Libyans were indicted for the bombing, described the case as “so full of holes it was like Swiss cheese” and said it should never have gone to trial.
He claimed the CIA and FBI had assured State Department officials there was an “iron-clad” case against Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and al-Amin Khalifa Fimah, but that in reality the intelligence agencies had no confidence in their star witness and knew well in advance of the trial that he was “a liar”.
Scharf branded the case a “whitewash” and added: “It was a trial where everybody agreed ahead of time that they were just going to focus on these two guys, and they were the fall guys.”
The comments by Scharf are controversial, given his position in US intelligence during the Lockerbie investigation and trial. It also comes at a crucial time as the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) is to report in the coming months on whether it believes there was a miscarriage of justice in the case.
In January 2001, following a trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, Fimah was acquitted and al-Megrahi was sentenced to life in a Scottish jail for his part in the December 1988 bombing.
Scharf joined the State Department’s Office of the Legal Adviser for Law Enforcement and Intelligence in April 1989, just four months after Pan Am Flight 103 was downed and at the height of the CIA’s Lockerbie bombing investigation. He was also responsible for drawing up the UN Security Council resolutions that imposed sanctions on Libya in 1992 in order to force Tripoli to hand over al-Megrahi and Fimah for trial.
He added: “The CIA and the FBI kept the State Department in the dark. It worked for them for us to be fully committed to the theory that Libya was responsible. I helped the counter- terrorism bureau draft documents that described why we thought Libya was responsible, but these were not based on seeing a lot of evidence, but rather on representations from the CIA and FBI and the Department of Justice about what the case would prove and did prove.
“It was largely based on this inside guy [Libyan defector Abdul Majid Giaka]. It wasn’t until the trial that I learned this guy was a nut-job and that the CIA had absolutely no confidence in him and that they knew he was a liar.
“ It was a case that was so full of holes it was like Swiss cheese. ”
Scharf, now an international law expert at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio, said he was convinced that Libya, Iran and the Palestinian terrorist group the PFLP-GC were involved in the bombing, which killed 270 people. But, he said, the case had a “diplomatic rather than a purely legal goal”.
“Now Libya has given up its weapons of mass destruction, it’s allowed inspectors in, the sanctions have been lifted, tourists from the US are flocking to see the Roman ruins outside of Tripoli and Gaddafi has become a leader in Africa rather than a pariah. And all of that is the result of this trial,” Scharf said. “Diplomatically, it has been a huge success story. But legally, it just seemed like a whitewash to me.”
Robert Black, professor of Scots law at Edinburgh University and the principal architect of the Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist, described the Lockerbie case as “a fraud”.
“That the trial at Camp Zeist resulted in a conviction is a disgrace for Scottish justice,” he said. “I think this [Scharf’s comments] indicates that a growing number of people on both sides of the Atlantic now believe they were used in this case.”
Dr Jim Swire, who lost his daughter Flora in the bombing, said: “Myself and Michael Scharf are coming from exactly the same position. I went to the trial and became convinced after watching it unfold that the case was full of holes.”
Tony Kelly, al-Megrahi’s solicitor, said he would not comment while the SCCRC was still examining the case.
No-one at the CIA in Washington was available to comment.
12 November 2006
[Edited by Ten Thousand Motels]
[Edited by Ten Thousand Motels] |
| 16th November 2006 04:53 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
quote:
LOL!!! Yeah,that's it. I'll get all my political news from a magazine that clearly has an agenda
yeah......God forbid a Rolling Stones fan would read 'Rolling Stone'!! the geeks left the Stones LONG ago.....
and now they just pretend to be cool.....
|
