Posted on 04/01/2007 4:44:20 PM PDT by StarCMC
Good afternoon, citizen.
Well, I don't know about the rest of you folks, but I'll throw in $20. Maybe we can all pitch in and buy 'em for Tom for his birthday. :-D
BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAA!!! They can’t be worth much more than that!
Hey you! Yep - :-)
ROFLMBO!!
Luv, you are so busted when he sees that! :-)
*snicker*
I know! I’ll takes my chances! :D
ROFL OMGGG that something Tomkow would you want be Cubs owner LOL!
Hey guys just blame it on my STUPID LA TImes for being bunch of Leftists they wouldn’t had problems if was fair and balance HELLO
Well...took the quiz and answered all the questions twice and all I got was ‘Push the back button and answer all the Questions”...twice. Ergo, not a nerd...twice.
BTTT
It's Tuesday. Just now waking up to start to brand new day.
No, matter of fact the lake is still 15 or so feet low. That is the better hunting part. I found a perfect Fairland point on Saturday when I was looking for driftwood. It is similar to this.
For warfare until after WW2, I can see how these rules would apply. After the attrocities our men suffered under Japanese and German rule, the whole thing should be disregarded and thrown out. Especially when fighting against terrorists, who use every rule to their advantage and to our disadvantage.
Since WW2, it is as though the USA is fighting every war with one hand behind our back. Our own guys are being destroyed for violations of an agreement yet our enemies are lauded for their violations of it.
I am sorry if this was to be an upbeat thread. The Geneva Constriction is one of my sore spots.
We use a MOAB (Mother Of All Banners) nearly every week to encourage our troops at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and to defeat the Commie Pinkos way down the street.
Here a group are carrying it to set it up.
For those who cannot read backwards, it says,
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS
DEFENDERS OF FREEDOM
AMERICAN HEROES
Captured combatants and civilians who find themselves under the authority of the adverse party are entitled to respect for their life, their dignity, their personal rights and their political, religious and other convictions. They must be protected against all acts of violence or reprisal. They are entitled to exchange news with their families and receive aid.
Everyone must enjoy basic judicial guarantees and no one may be held responsible for an act he has not committed. No one may be subjected to physical or mental torture or to cruel or degrading corporal punishment or other treatment.
Neither the parties to the conflict nor members of their armed forces have an unlimited rights to choose methods and means of warfare. It is forbidden to use weapons or methods of warfare that are likely to cause unnecessary losses or excessive suffering.
The parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants in order to spare the civilian population and civilian property. Neither the civilian population as whole nor individual civilians may be attacked. Attacks may be made solely against military objectives.
With the 'war' in Iraq, this is hardly the case, is it? Perhaps it should be called something other than a war, considering it is terrorists whose religious agenda ignores all convention. Time for someone to invent a new word?!
Hi sweethearts my dear Freepers.
Been away, there is no place like home !
God Bless and Divine Speed to Our Troops !
We support and love you endlessly.
Amen!
Lots of rain . . . remaining grapes put out beautifully, but before I got the netting over them the deer came along and pruned them . . . sigh!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.