"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...

Doug Kanter wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
...



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
. earthlink.net...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
l.earthlink.net...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
. atl.earthlink.net...



Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the
President's authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on
terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually
do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as
they returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the
Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were
targets of ethnic and religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials
detained dozens of others from their conference in December,
subjecting them to interrogations, fingerprinting and
photographing.

I have no problem with the "source" of this story...nor with
actions of the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Those 5 folks who were detained are certainly more apt to commit
terrorist attacks than an 80 year old grandmother. It's about time
they started racial profiling...especially for people who travel to
"conferences" that have suspected ties to terrorism.


Besides...questioning, fingerprinting, and photographing hardly
qualify as "detainment". So what's the big deal?

But professor, you objected to the exact same type of policies when
practiced by the USSR. Sorry. Can't have it both ways.

No I didn't. I'm all for a National Photo ID card and fingerprint
and/or retinal scans at the airport and border crossings.


Nope. You're lying. When you were younger, you went along with the
anti-communist party line, agreed with Reagan 100% about his "evil
empire" views. The totalitarian tactics were the bane of your
existence. You only claim to approve of them now because the only way
you can tread water in a debate is to bait your opponents.

WTF are you talking about?


I'll simplify this. You say you believe in things like ID cards, etc.,
and that you were OK with similar obscenities when practiced in the USSR
and its Eastern European satellite countries. You're lying to yourself
when you make that statement. Why? Because you haven't thoroughly
thought out all the ramifications of these practices, many of which are
the reason so many fled from those countries.

You will now say that people left those countries because they wanted to
live in a free enterprise system, but that's hardly the whole story and
you know it.

So, think about this: You're anchored somewhere quiet on your boat, just
you and the girlfriend, or maybe even your wife. You're about to
administer a beef injection down in the cabin when a boat pulls up and
announces on its loudspeaker "Come out of the cabin with your ID cards.
You have 30 seconds." You can't get dressed quick enough, so you are
boarded, and both of you are dragged, half naked, out of the cabin. The
cabin is tossed by the "authorities" you say you believe in. Meanwhile,
your ID card is in your pocket, but they toss the entire cabin anyway.

They search your girlfriend's purse and find she's carrying a handgun.
They see her permit. In Florida, you are not required to notify an
officer that you're carrying, but these guys are Feds, so because they
think their **** don't stink, they believe the law applies only to state
or local cops. They tell your girlfriend that because she forgot to
inform them of the gun, they're confiscating it, and her too. "The
president's gonna be down this way for a fund raiser next week. What did
you have in mind with the gun, lady?"

This is potentially what you are agreeing with. And if you think there
aren't enough antisocial types who'd gladly sign up, put on a uniform,
and do things like this to innocent citizens under the guise of
"national security", think again. You've already seen it done.



It's far worse than your scenario, Doug. If there is a federal ID card,
and you are required to show it for various reasons, there also will be
various nefarious reasons why the authorities will take the card from
you, and you'll be unable to travel or to do any of the other things that
require the card.


The legislation can be written to avoid such a thing from happening.
It's an *IDENTIFICATION* card, for crying out loud.

It makes processing the bad guys a whole lot easier.




Sorry, but I wouldn't trust the thugs in the Bush administration to
squeegee my windshield, much less issue national ID cards.

I can see your point. If such a measure went through the House and Senate
in 1993 or 1994, when the Dems controlled the White House and Congress, I'd
have been very afraid too.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message


This is potentially what you are agreeing with. And if you think there
aren't enough antisocial types who'd gladly sign up, put on a uniform,
and
do things like this to innocent citizens under the guise of "national
security", think again. You've already seen it done.

The Feds have had this power on the waterways for some time now. It has
nothing to do with ID cards.


Forget it, NYOB. You're arguing with small-minded, liberal chicken-littles,
and their sky is falling.

Jack

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. ..

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message


This is potentially what you are agreeing with. And if you think there
aren't enough antisocial types who'd gladly sign up, put on a uniform,
and
do things like this to innocent citizens under the guise of "national
security", think again. You've already seen it done.

The Feds have had this power on the waterways for some time now. It has
nothing to do with ID cards.


Forget it, NYOB. You're arguing with small-minded, liberal
chicken-littles,
and their sky is falling.

It must be a very high sky. It's been falling for over 4 years now...and
still hasn't crashed down on anybody's head.

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
arthlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
.earthlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
tl.earthlink.net...


Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the
President's authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on
terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually
do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as
they returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the
Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were
targets of ethnic and religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials detained
dozens of others from their conference in December, subjecting them
to interrogations, fingerprinting and photographing.

I have no problem with the "source" of this story...nor with actions
of the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Those 5 folks who were detained are certainly more apt to commit
terrorist attacks than an 80 year old grandmother. It's about time
they started racial profiling...especially for people who travel to
"conferences" that have suspected ties to terrorism.


Besides...questioning, fingerprinting, and photographing hardly
qualify as "detainment". So what's the big deal?

But professor, you objected to the exact same type of policies when
practiced by the USSR. Sorry. Can't have it both ways.

No I didn't. I'm all for a National Photo ID card and fingerprint
and/or retinal scans at the airport and border crossings.


Nope. You're lying. When you were younger, you went along with the
anti-communist party line, agreed with Reagan 100% about his "evil
empire" views. The totalitarian tactics were the bane of your
existence. You only claim to approve of them now because the only way
you can tread water in a debate is to bait your opponents.

WTF are you talking about?


I'll simplify this. You say you believe in things like ID cards, etc.,
and that you were OK with similar obscenities when practiced in the USSR
and its Eastern European satellite countries. You're lying to yourself
when you make that statement. Why? Because you haven't thoroughly
thought out all the ramifications of these practices, many of which are
the reason so many fled from those countries.

You will now say that people left those countries because they wanted to
live in a free enterprise system, but that's hardly the whole story and
you know it.

So, think about this: You're anchored somewhere quiet on your boat, just
you and the girlfriend, or maybe even your wife. You're about to
administer a beef injection down in the cabin when a boat pulls up and
announces on its loudspeaker "Come out of the cabin with your ID cards.
You have 30 seconds." You can't get dressed quick enough, so you are
boarded, and both of you are dragged, half naked, out of the cabin. The
cabin is tossed by the "authorities" you say you believe in. Meanwhile,
your ID card is in your pocket, but they toss the entire cabin anyway.

They search your girlfriend's purse and find she's carrying a handgun.
They see her permit. In Florida, you are not required to notify an
officer that you're carrying, but these guys are Feds, so because they
think their **** don't stink, they believe the law applies only to state
or local cops. They tell your girlfriend that because she forgot to
inform them of the gun, they're confiscating it, and her too. "The
president's gonna be down this way for a fund raiser next week. What did
you have in mind with the gun, lady?"

This is potentially what you are agreeing with. And if you think there
aren't enough antisocial types who'd gladly sign up, put on a uniform,
and do things like this to innocent citizens under the guise of
"national security", think again. You've already seen it done.



It's far worse than your scenario, Doug. If there is a federal ID card,
and you are required to show it for various reasons, there also will be
various nefarious reasons why the authorities will take the card from
you, and you'll be unable to travel or to do any of the other things that
require the card.

The legislation can be written to avoid such a thing from happening. It's
an *IDENTIFICATION* card, for crying out loud.

It makes processing the bad guys a whole lot easier.



The law indirectly suggests that cops not butt **** a suspect with a
broomstick, or shoot a suspect 47 times before figuring out he's unarmed.
And yet, both of these things have happened in recent years. So much for
legislation.

NOYB,
Exactly, we need to abolish Drivers License and passports.

Since Bush instituted them the country has gone down the tubes. Drivers
Licenses and passports reek of Nazi suppression.


"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
news
NOYB wrote:
"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
news
NOYB wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
. earthlink.net...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
l.earthlink.net...



Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the
President's authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on
terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as
they returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the
Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were
targets of ethnic and religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials detained
dozens of others from their conference in December, subjecting them
to interrogations, fingerprinting and photographing.

I have no problem with the "source" of this story...nor with actions
of the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Those 5 folks who were detained are certainly more apt to commit
terrorist attacks than an 80 year old grandmother. It's about time
they started racial profiling...especially for people who travel to
"conferences" that have suspected ties to terrorism.


Besides...questioning, fingerprinting, and photographing hardly
qualify as "detainment". So what's the big deal?

But professor, you objected to the exact same type of policies when
practiced by the USSR. Sorry. Can't have it both ways.


No I didn't. I'm all for a National Photo ID card and fingerprint
and/or retinal scans at the airport and border crossings.



All good little fascists and communists want national photo IDs.


Only us fascists with nothing to hide. What's the difference, really?
We already have passports and state-issued drivers licenses.



Never read much WW II/Soviet State history, eh?

I meant...
What's the difference between a national photo idea and a passport or
state-issued drivers license? Or even a social security card?

Harry,
Can we expect a fishing report from your 36' Lobster Boat or are you only
using your canoe this year?


"harry.krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:

As opposed to Bert, who joined the Marine Corps to fight communism, but
knew nothing about it.

Interestingly, both Bert and our latest anonymous remailer poster curse
about the same. Anyone else notice?


You are too funny. Are you going to go fishing in river that your 36'
lobsta boat can't navigate this weekend?

When stripper trophy season is in full swing you are fishing for Blue
Gill in a fresh water river hundreds of miles from the bay?

My wife doesn't let me fish for strippers, Bertie. And the bluegill aren't
running in the Shenandoah yet. They're a warm-water, July-August kind of
fish. And they taste better than stripers.

Striped bass are not among my favorite fish, Bertie. They never have been.
Trolling for them ain't much fun. Dragging huge artificial baits or
umbrella rigs in order to snag a fish that isn't known as much of a
fighter ain't much fun. Being out in the middle of 50-100 other boats
trolling and trying to snag the same fish ain't much fun. When I fish in
the Bay, I look for flounder, trout, blues, et cetera, and leave the
stripers for the inept fishermen, like your buddy John Herring.

Why is this of concern to you, Bertie? You don't boat, you don't fish. You
just pop in here to take your shots at others and to practice your cursing
skills, right?



--
Bush and the NeoConvicts who control him
are destroying the once-great United States.

Reminder -
There have only been two terrorist attacks on US soil, 1993 and 2001. That
is EIGHT years apart, if the terrorist maintain that schedule we are not due
for another attack until 2009.





"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

April 30, 2005, 11:31PM



Terrorist threats on U.S. at lowest level since 9/11
Officials think focus has turned to troops in Iraq
Washington Post

WASHINGTON - Reports of credible terrorist threats against the United
States
are at their lowest level since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according
to
U.S. intelligence officials and federal and state law enforcement
authorities.

The intelligence community's daily threat assessment, developed after the
terrorist attacks to keep policymakers informed, lists, on average, 25 to
50
percent fewer threats against domestic targets than it typically did
during
the past two years, said one senior counterterrorism official.

Many counterterrorism officials think al-Qaida and like-minded groups are
focusing on Americans deployed in Iraq, where they operate with relative
impunity, and on Europe.

Though some are expressing caution and even skepticism, interviews last
week
with 25 current or recently retired officials also cited progress in
counterterrorism operations abroad and a more experienced
homeland-security
apparatus for a general feeling that it is more difficult for terrorists
to
operate undetected. The officials represent federal intelligence and law
enforcement agencies, state and local homeland-security departments and
the
private sector.

"We are breathing easier," said U.S. Capitol Police Chief Terrance Gainer,
whose officers guard one of al-Qaida's expressed targets and who is
regularly briefed by the FBI and CIA. "The imminence of a threat seems to
have diminished. We're just not as worried as we were a year ago, but we
certainly are as vigilant."

"I agree," said John Brennan, acting director of the National
Counterterrorism Center, told of Gainer's assessment. "Progress has been
made."

Brennan also said the initial post-Sept. 11 belief that there were large
numbers of sleeper cells in the United States turned out to be "a lot of
hyperbole." Some thought "there was a terrorist under every rock."

But some intelligence analysts caution that the drop-off in
terrorist-related planning, communication and movement could be a tactical
pause.

Brennan and others fear most what they are not hearing or seeing,
especially
the possibility that al-Qaida has acquired chemical or biological weapons
and adapted in ways that have evaded detection. Analysts also say a flood
of
new terrorists motivated by the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq may try to
travel
here and reverse the relative calm of today's environment.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
. earthlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
l.earthlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
. atl.earthlink.net...


Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the
President's authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on
terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually
do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as
they returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the
Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were
targets of ethnic and religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials
detained dozens of others from their conference in December,
subjecting them to interrogations, fingerprinting and
photographing.

I have no problem with the "source" of this story...nor with
actions of the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Those 5 folks who were detained are certainly more apt to commit
terrorist attacks than an 80 year old grandmother. It's about time
they started racial profiling...especially for people who travel to
"conferences" that have suspected ties to terrorism.


Besides...questioning, fingerprinting, and photographing hardly
qualify as "detainment". So what's the big deal?

But professor, you objected to the exact same type of policies when
practiced by the USSR. Sorry. Can't have it both ways.

No I didn't. I'm all for a National Photo ID card and fingerprint
and/or retinal scans at the airport and border crossings.


Nope. You're lying. When you were younger, you went along with the
anti-communist party line, agreed with Reagan 100% about his "evil
empire" views. The totalitarian tactics were the bane of your
existence. You only claim to approve of them now because the only way
you can tread water in a debate is to bait your opponents.

WTF are you talking about?


I'll simplify this. You say you believe in things like ID cards, etc.,
and that you were OK with similar obscenities when practiced in the
USSR and its Eastern European satellite countries. You're lying to
yourself when you make that statement. Why? Because you haven't
thoroughly thought out all the ramifications of these practices, many
of which are the reason so many fled from those countries.

You will now say that people left those countries because they wanted
to live in a free enterprise system, but that's hardly the whole story
and you know it.

So, think about this: You're anchored somewhere quiet on your boat,
just you and the girlfriend, or maybe even your wife. You're about to
administer a beef injection down in the cabin when a boat pulls up and
announces on its loudspeaker "Come out of the cabin with your ID cards.
You have 30 seconds." You can't get dressed quick enough, so you are
boarded, and both of you are dragged, half naked, out of the cabin. The
cabin is tossed by the "authorities" you say you believe in. Meanwhile,
your ID card is in your pocket, but they toss the entire cabin anyway.

They search your girlfriend's purse and find she's carrying a handgun.
They see her permit. In Florida, you are not required to notify an
officer that you're carrying, but these guys are Feds, so because they
think their **** don't stink, they believe the law applies only to
state or local cops. They tell your girlfriend that because she forgot
to inform them of the gun, they're confiscating it, and her too. "The
president's gonna be down this way for a fund raiser next week. What
did you have in mind with the gun, lady?"

This is potentially what you are agreeing with. And if you think there
aren't enough antisocial types who'd gladly sign up, put on a uniform,
and do things like this to innocent citizens under the guise of
"national security", think again. You've already seen it done.



It's far worse than your scenario, Doug. If there is a federal ID card,
and you are required to show it for various reasons, there also will be
various nefarious reasons why the authorities will take the card from
you, and you'll be unable to travel or to do any of the other things
that require the card.

The legislation can be written to avoid such a thing from happening.
It's an *IDENTIFICATION* card, for crying out loud.

It makes processing the bad guys a whole lot easier.



The law indirectly suggests that cops not butt **** a suspect with a
broomstick, or shoot a suspect 47 times before figuring out he's unarmed.
And yet, both of these things have happened in recent years. So much for
legislation.

And those who abused their power were held accountable and punished under
the existing laws.

Harry,
Let's just kill all the conservatives and let God sort them out.


"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Gorf wrote:
Reminder -
There have only been two terrorist attacks on US soil, 1993 and 2001.
That
is EIGHT years apart, if the terrorist maintain that schedule we are not
due
for another attack until 2009.



You mean, of course, only two perpetrated by foreign born terrorists. We
did have the Oklahoma City bombing, the Atlanta bombing, and the abortion
clinic bombings, all terrorist attacks conducted by native-born
conservative extremists, as opposed to foreign-born conservative
extremists.

"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. ..

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message

This is potentially what you are agreeing with. And if you think there
aren't enough antisocial types who'd gladly sign up, put on a uniform,

and

do things like this to innocent citizens under the guise of "national
security", think again. You've already seen it done.

The Feds have had this power on the waterways for some time now. It has
nothing to do with ID cards.


Forget it, NYOB. You're arguing with small-minded, liberal
chicken-littles,
and their sky is falling.


It must be a very high sky. It's been falling for over 4 years now...and
still hasn't crashed down on anybody's head.


No? What about the 3000 who died because of Bush's malfeasance? The sky
and the building and the plane crashed down on them.

The planning for that attack was under way for several years prior to Bush
taking office. Bush had the misfortune of having to rely on information
gathered by Clinton-appointees.

Notice how there hasn't been an attack since Bush went on the offensive with
*his* people in the important positions?