Remster 30 #26 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWe're not just going to shoot anybody. We want to make it damn near impossible for drug and human smugglers to get through the area. Our focus is to block the area and deny access to drug cartels. We want to make sure we make their lives miserable. It will be deadly for them to cross that border, and we will ensure that we operate within the statutes in the Arizona Revised Code when it comes to acting out in self defense when we have to. If these guys don't want to be vulture food, they should consider finding another career. CLICKY Soooo...."Protecting their Property makes Them Nazi's? I must be a nazi! But then judging by your past post..YOU are closer to a Nazi than any of those people! Did you even bother reading the rest of thread or links, or googled what their group is (here, since you can't bother http://tinyurl.com/382tah7)? Of course not, you don't bother researching the junk you post yourself...Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #27 June 24, 2010 >Soooo...."Protecting their Property makes Them Nazi's? No. Them being a neo-Nazi party makes them Nazis. The swastika they use as a logo is a hint too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #28 June 24, 2010 Quote...a leader of the Mesa Chapter of the National Socialist Movement, believed to be the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States, led a group of armed men during an operation on Bureau of Land Management property Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #29 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote...a leader of the Mesa Chapter of the National Socialist Movement, believed to be the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States, led a group of armed men during an operation on Bureau of Land Management property Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #30 June 24, 2010 >Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? Sure, as long as Jake and/or Ellwood aren't around. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #31 June 24, 2010 Quote They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. One of those funny little things that come with citizenship. I do wish that we didn't leave a big assed gap that these idiots feel the need to fill.You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #32 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. One of those funny little things that come with citizenship. I do wish that we didn't leave a big assed gap that these idiots feel the need to fill. It is what it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #33 June 24, 2010 Quote>Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? Sure, as long as Jake and/or Ellwood aren't around. Illinois nazi's I hate Illinois nazis.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #34 June 24, 2010 Illinois Nazis Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #35 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote...a leader of the Mesa Chapter of the National Socialist Movement, believed to be the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States, led a group of armed men during an operation on Bureau of Land Management property Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #36 June 24, 2010 >Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out >and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though >they're doing nothing illegal? Nope. But if the Brady Campaign was protesting on the sidewalk outside your house, I bet you'd be somewhat annoyed - even if you support the first amendment and all. And if a friend's funeral was disrupted by the Westboro Baptists I'd bet you'd find that unfortunate as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #37 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote...a leader of the Mesa Chapter of the National Socialist Movement, believed to be the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States, led a group of armed men during an operation on Bureau of Land Management property Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #38 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote...a leader of the Mesa Chapter of the National Socialist Movement, believed to be the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States, led a group of armed men during an operation on Bureau of Land Management property Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? Of course they should be. But some people are just plain scary. I find neo-Nazis to be scary. Now, scary people have the same constitutional right to do things like form citizens' mutual-protection patrols and keep and bear arms that you and I do, but I have a hard time trusting them to not abuse those rights and behave irresponsibly, or dangerously or unlawfully. So when it comes to rights, yes, neo-Nazis have the right. But when it comes to trust, no, they don't have my trust. And thus it follows that I have the right to voice my concern publicly and seek to influence public opinion about it. In fact, I might just form my own citizens' watch group to watch their citizens' watch group. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #39 June 24, 2010 First this: Quote You cant trust a hate group to follow this. If they hate already, then they will find a way to shoot someone and try to make it look like self defense. Then this: Quote Indeed. And I'm sure that these guys will be very, very careful to distinguish between drug runners and simple illegal immigrants before they start shooting, what with all their law enforcement legal training and all. And somewhere, everywhere many people whine about the reputation of the illegals coming over to rape, rob and murder innocent American citizens. Point is....everybody has everybody pre-judged and convicted beforehand. Country is already going to hell...it's just looking for a bigger hand basket.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
captain1976 0 #40 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteWe're not just going to shoot anybody. We want to make it damn near impossible for drug and human smugglers to get through the area. Our focus is to block the area and deny access to drug cartels. We want to make sure we make their lives miserable. It will be deadly for them to cross that border, and we will ensure that we operate within the statutes in the Arizona Revised Code when it comes to acting out in self defense when we have to. If these guys don't want to be vulture food, they should consider finding another career. Thank you for your service to our Country. And thanks for having the balls to do something our government wont. http://pobeptsworld.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/illegal-aliens-are-a-real-threat-to-americans/You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChangoLanzao 0 #41 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWe're not just going to shoot anybody. We want to make it damn near impossible for drug and human smugglers to get through the area. Our focus is to block the area and deny access to drug cartels. We want to make sure we make their lives miserable. It will be deadly for them to cross that border, and we will ensure that we operate within the statutes in the Arizona Revised Code when it comes to acting out in self defense when we have to. If these guys don't want to be vulture food, they should consider finding another career. Thank you for your service to our Country. And thanks for having the balls to do something our government wont. http://pobeptsworld.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/illegal-aliens-are-a-real-threat-to-americans/ A real smelly crock of shit, that. He posts a load of phony stats and even states that he hasn't bothered to confirm his sources! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #42 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChangoLanzao 0 #43 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #44 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. so the AZ legislature is limiting the free speech of american citizens in AZ? When did this happen?-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChangoLanzao 0 #45 June 25, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. so the AZ legislature is limiting the free speech of american citizens in AZ? When did this happen? I chose a broader definition of the word "squelch" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #46 June 25, 2010 Quote I chose a broader definition of the word "squelch" no wonder nobody understands your arguments. Your words don't mean the same thing as our words. :P-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,555 #47 June 25, 2010 Quote One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. This I agree with. All this Constitutional freedom stuff is messy and expensive, but it sure beats the alternative. Of course, all that free speech causes more change than a more restricted environment, and, frankly, I'm a change junkie Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites labrys 0 #48 June 25, 2010 QuotePoint is....everybody has everybody pre-judged and convicted beforehand. Here are 2 quotes from the link to their thesis that I provided, Andy: Quote We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, usurers, profiteers, race traitors, etc. must be severely punished, whatever their creed or race. That little "etc" that they slip in at the end makes me really, really uncomfortable. QuoteThe leaders of the movement promise to work ruthlessly-if need be to sacrifice their very lives-to translate this program into action. So, these guys publicly state that their leadership is willing to die to ensure that, among many other things, "race traitors" and "etc" are ruthlessly prosecuted. I don't think I'm pre-judging them.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #49 June 25, 2010 Quote Quote One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. This I agree with. All this Constitutional freedom stuff is messy and expensive, but it sure beats the alternative. Of course, all that free speech causes more change than a more restricted environment, and, frankly, I'm a change junkie Wendy P. Be careful whatyouwish for. You just may get it.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #50 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuotePoint is....everybody has everybody pre-judged and convicted beforehand. Here are 2 quotes from the link to their thesis that I provided, Andy: Quote We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, usurers, profiteers, race traitors, etc. must be severely punished, whatever their creed or race. That little "etc" that they slip in at the end makes me really, really uncomfortable. It's likely that "usurers" is code for something more than just "bankers", also. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
ChangoLanzao 0 #41 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWe're not just going to shoot anybody. We want to make it damn near impossible for drug and human smugglers to get through the area. Our focus is to block the area and deny access to drug cartels. We want to make sure we make their lives miserable. It will be deadly for them to cross that border, and we will ensure that we operate within the statutes in the Arizona Revised Code when it comes to acting out in self defense when we have to. If these guys don't want to be vulture food, they should consider finding another career. Thank you for your service to our Country. And thanks for having the balls to do something our government wont. http://pobeptsworld.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/illegal-aliens-are-a-real-threat-to-americans/ A real smelly crock of shit, that. He posts a load of phony stats and even states that he hasn't bothered to confirm his sources! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #42 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChangoLanzao 0 #43 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #44 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. so the AZ legislature is limiting the free speech of american citizens in AZ? When did this happen?-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChangoLanzao 0 #45 June 25, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. so the AZ legislature is limiting the free speech of american citizens in AZ? When did this happen? I chose a broader definition of the word "squelch" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #46 June 25, 2010 Quote I chose a broader definition of the word "squelch" no wonder nobody understands your arguments. Your words don't mean the same thing as our words. :P-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,555 #47 June 25, 2010 Quote One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. This I agree with. All this Constitutional freedom stuff is messy and expensive, but it sure beats the alternative. Of course, all that free speech causes more change than a more restricted environment, and, frankly, I'm a change junkie Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites labrys 0 #48 June 25, 2010 QuotePoint is....everybody has everybody pre-judged and convicted beforehand. Here are 2 quotes from the link to their thesis that I provided, Andy: Quote We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, usurers, profiteers, race traitors, etc. must be severely punished, whatever their creed or race. That little "etc" that they slip in at the end makes me really, really uncomfortable. QuoteThe leaders of the movement promise to work ruthlessly-if need be to sacrifice their very lives-to translate this program into action. So, these guys publicly state that their leadership is willing to die to ensure that, among many other things, "race traitors" and "etc" are ruthlessly prosecuted. I don't think I'm pre-judging them.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #49 June 25, 2010 Quote Quote One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. This I agree with. All this Constitutional freedom stuff is messy and expensive, but it sure beats the alternative. Of course, all that free speech causes more change than a more restricted environment, and, frankly, I'm a change junkie Wendy P. Be careful whatyouwish for. You just may get it.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #50 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuotePoint is....everybody has everybody pre-judged and convicted beforehand. Here are 2 quotes from the link to their thesis that I provided, Andy: Quote We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, usurers, profiteers, race traitors, etc. must be severely punished, whatever their creed or race. That little "etc" that they slip in at the end makes me really, really uncomfortable. It's likely that "usurers" is code for something more than just "bankers", also. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
JohnRich 4 #42 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #43 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #44 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteShould neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. so the AZ legislature is limiting the free speech of american citizens in AZ? When did this happen?-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #45 June 25, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Should neo-nazis not be allowed to hike on public land? They have a right to be there. Unfortunately. Why is that unfortunate? Would you prefer to live in a country where the government can single out and deny rights and/or privileges to groups they don't like, even though they're doing nothing illegal? No. I prefer to live in a country where there are no fucking Nazis. One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress the Arizona legislature who would squelch groups of brown people they don't like. Edit: Fixed it. so the AZ legislature is limiting the free speech of american citizens in AZ? When did this happen? I chose a broader definition of the word "squelch" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #46 June 25, 2010 Quote I chose a broader definition of the word "squelch" no wonder nobody understands your arguments. Your words don't mean the same thing as our words. :P-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,555 #47 June 25, 2010 Quote One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. This I agree with. All this Constitutional freedom stuff is messy and expensive, but it sure beats the alternative. Of course, all that free speech causes more change than a more restricted environment, and, frankly, I'm a change junkie Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #48 June 25, 2010 QuotePoint is....everybody has everybody pre-judged and convicted beforehand. Here are 2 quotes from the link to their thesis that I provided, Andy: Quote We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, usurers, profiteers, race traitors, etc. must be severely punished, whatever their creed or race. That little "etc" that they slip in at the end makes me really, really uncomfortable. QuoteThe leaders of the movement promise to work ruthlessly-if need be to sacrifice their very lives-to translate this program into action. So, these guys publicly state that their leadership is willing to die to ensure that, among many other things, "race traitors" and "etc" are ruthlessly prosecuted. I don't think I'm pre-judging them.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #49 June 25, 2010 Quote Quote One must be careful not to trade one small set of nazis for a much larger and more powerful set. I'd rather have these guys running around in the desert, then another group in Congress who would squelch groups they don't like. This I agree with. All this Constitutional freedom stuff is messy and expensive, but it sure beats the alternative. Of course, all that free speech causes more change than a more restricted environment, and, frankly, I'm a change junkie Wendy P. Be careful whatyouwish for. You just may get it.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #50 June 25, 2010 QuoteQuotePoint is....everybody has everybody pre-judged and convicted beforehand. Here are 2 quotes from the link to their thesis that I provided, Andy: Quote We demand the ruthless prosecution of those whose activities are injurious to the common interest. Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, usurers, profiteers, race traitors, etc. must be severely punished, whatever their creed or race. That little "etc" that they slip in at the end makes me really, really uncomfortable. It's likely that "usurers" is code for something more than just "bankers", also. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
