muff528

,...because it was not lawfully passed as it contravened the superior constitutional law under which the democratically elected representatives of the people were constrained. ....in the opinion of that one guy.

The court held that this is violative of the 1st and probably 5th amendments because the "substantially supports" language could be used to prevent people from writing about what is going on. A reporter may be detained for quoting a jihadist under the reading of the statute, for example. The government's defense to this allegation can be narrowed down to "We would never do that!" Yeah, right. To me, the first sentence seems more disconcerting than the second. On the surface it looks like it explicitly gives the President "the authority to detain..." based on his own king-like personal determination or whim. The "substantially supported" language seems like a minor concern when the Pres can simply "determine" whatever he wants. I'm sure there is other language in the law that clarifies that.

Evil: Hot rod canopy pilots wearing logo infested, color coordinated clothes. Useta be the freestylers and the head-downers. Also 10-way done any way other than no-show, single-file, free-fly.

Yes, that is what happens when there is only one side of the story because the other party is dead. Quite the opposite. Almost everyone who has been convicted of murder has been convicted without the "other party" telling his side of the story. The prosecutors had to build their cases based on evidence and witnesses ...just like this case (well, in principle).

Not to worry. The Feds have a back-up plan in case some renegade judge decides to dismiss ...or if some jury is foolish enough to acquit. This ain't about truth or justice ...it's about vengeance and retribution and George has been selected to pay.

Yeah. FD was called. They suggested the power company. So...

Might have been up there all weekend

But enough about you! ...Where's that summary you promised? Sorry, but that was just too much to resist ...served up on a silver platter and all.

"War on terror" -- mis-titled but a real war with a real enemy nonetheless. "Mission Accomplished" -- gimme a break. "Patriot Act" -- written with provisions for Congressional oversight and with a sunset by the old guy. The new guy seems to have extended the parts which might be considered the most unconstitutional. Actually I am against the Act but only because of the inevitability of its misuse by a would-be megalomaniac.

Dr. Britt forgot #15: Fabricating academic pinheads and then referring to their writings to provide "support" for delusional rants. But just to answer #1, most fascist takeovers of governments have been characterized by either discarding, distorting or adding to the stolen country's national symbolism. For example take the addition of clinched fists, silhouettes of "heroes" or the usage of personal logos such as the flash and circle and the swastika, etc. Also, slogans, rallying cries and songs are added to that country's repertoire and the use of traditional national symbols, pledges and songs is discouraged, demeaned or even condemned.

"old school" skydiving!

What! ...no Little Annie Fanny at the Zephyr Desert Parachute Center?

I understand your concern.

Hey! Maybe they could do that down in the Everglades to get rid of the pythons! Of course they would have to use pigs and goats instead of mice ...but what the heck!

I've always packed my Sabre (and Ariel) by flopping 4 cells together towards the center (not rolling); then the other 4 cells; then flop the center cell; didn't stuff them inside; then, making sure the slider is all the way down against the stops, pull the slider completely out front and over the nose. Then roll the tail tightly making sure all lines remained in the center. Always on heading and always "brisk" but not slamming. But, shoulders must remain level or it will open hard and in a spin. Most opening problems were after looking hard over my shoulder and not quite getting "square" again before pulling.

If you're going to be in St. Pete there is probably not much difference in distance. If you like a laid-back, family oriented, club-like atmosphere you'll like STB. I used to get down there at least a couple times a month just for the Cessna (taking a break from the turbines and the DC3 at Zhills even though Cliff did occasionally bring in something a little more "exotic"

...and their contributions to warming continue even to the present day! (allegedly)

Jim McGuinn is no T.S. Eliot but I suppose this could be a poem if you don't sing it.

Well, the Occupiers do understand something that the west hasn't understood since WW2 .....there is no such thing as a "civilian" in a war. Obviously "the average Joe", by participating in commerce and going to his job and working, is supporting the corporations and bankers which are clearly the enemies of the Occupiers. These evil entities could not exist without Joe. Sweet J45 and another- but this one does have some cool footage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVWTeXzgkJE&feature=related

You avoid what's in fact a rather good question. And the protesters weren't empowered, it was the opposite in fact. Yes, it was a good question, and not avoided if you got my meaning. My answer was to simply ignore them. Yep. Cuz ignoring things makes them go away. It's sure worked great for the debt and bullying just to name two. Who cares whether the protesters "go away" or not? (BTW, Singing to them won't make 'em leave either. Well, not unless you can get Slim Whitman to sing "Indian Love Call" to them.)

You avoid what's in fact a rather good question. And the protesters weren't empowered, it was the opposite in fact. Yes, it was a good question, and not avoided if you got my meaning. My answer was to simply ignore them.

Well, IMO it's all a bit silly. I suppose they could have been out there at break time and decided to poke at stick at the Muslims. Well, a Global Convention looks a little "organized" to me. Again, not criticizing. I doubt if it would do them some good. I don't know if atheism is illegal in Egypt, but I don't think it would be a good idea to come out of the closet if you're one. And, if you're small minority under tyranny there's not that much choice. Then that's their choice. Gandhi would tell them, "submit and take it up the kazoo." Others might say "let's fight our way out of here! Maybe we can get some help from the 'Merkans." That's not true, I doubt, for example, if more then 1% of the contents of the bible is about other religions being wrong. You meant "lore" as in scriptures of various religions; I really was referring to something more like differences in interpretation or application of those writings giving differing groups a cause to refute others' religions or denominations. My mistake.

How should they have responded to them? I thought they were supposed to be inside having meetings and listening to speakers ...like the adult attendees. Why empower the protesters?

Nope. Only those who were outside doing the adolescent-like yelling and name-calliing 1) What happened to "two people discussing a feral cat problem is a political entity?" I meant that they would be discussing a community issue and a course of action to be taken ...not just a couple of folks passing time discussing the yin and yang of having free-range cats roam the neighborhood. Local politics. Small scale, but politics none the less. I think we have differing opinions of what is or is not "political" activity. (So, is organized atheism a religion ...or religion-like?) Yet, various opposing, "blasphemous" ideologies or "political entities" do exist in Bumfukt and a convention might do them some good (if they dared). Or they could just continue to live under tyranny. Their choice. Atheism is by it's very nature antagonistic, it can't possibly exist without theism, so yes, most of what's commonly considered to be atheistic lore is refuting religion. And your point is...? ...likewise, much of the lore of just about any given religion is refuting the lore of other religions.