Bin Laden's PEE PEE
MY PEE PEE
Posted on 11/24/2001 10:05:49 AM PST by ChaseR
"Loral was instrumental in obtaining technology transfer waivers from President (executive orders for cash) Clinton in violation of US State Department, Pentagon, and NSA policy, as well as the advice of the DOJ and his own then Attorney General, Janet (the butcher of Waco) Reno. Loral's transfer of sensitive and advanced ballistic missile guidance systems electronics, software, and encryption algorithms has allowed The People's (Communist) Republic of China to construct both the launch platforms and guidance systems to make MIRV nuclear warhead strikes on intercontinental targets in the US possible. This cannot be other than treason by any meaningful definition of the word, and those responsible up to and including the ex-President, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent that the law will allow. The penalty for treason is death and should be imposed for all guilty parties without hesitation or reference to the inappropriate life sentences given recently to others convicted of treasonous acts."
(good friends, I am leaving for out of town business tomorrow and won't be back for a week. However, I won't be posting on FR for all of next month. I'm hoping someone will bump this thread, the Clinton National Security Scandal thread, the Chinese Soldiers at the Panama Canal Live Webcam thread and also the McAuliffe threads. I'll ck now to see if any of these important threads need to have a new thread started. - - See you all - next year. Merry Xmas, Happy New Year and Happy Chanuka - to everyone here at FR.
good friends, I am leaving for out of town business tomorrow and won't be back for a week. However, I won't be posting on FR for all of next month. I'm hoping someone will bump this thread, the Clinton National Security Scandal thread, the Chinese Soldiers at the Panama Canal Live Webcam thread and also the McAuliffe threads. I'll ck now to see if any of these important threads need to have a new thread started. - - See you all - next year. Merry Xmas, Happy New Year and Happy Chanuka - to everyone here at FR.Happy Holidays to you too! Hope your business endeavors go your way - live long and prosper!
337 posted on 11/28/01 1:41 PM Pacific by BeAChooser
So far as I'm concerned, there is no argument; I agree with most knowledgeable people. That's all you need to know.
338 posted on 11/28/01 1:50 PM Pacific by BeAChooser
Careful, one-note, you're starting to sound sexist.
The only belief I've expoused (whatever the hell that is) on here is that I believe Larry Klayman is a shyster and crook.
Espouse (sorry, z is an s, and it means ADVOCATE). Howlin, you do indeed promote a "move-on" philosophy when it comes to the crimes in Chinagate, Filegate, Emailgate (in fact, you've even suggested no crimes were committed). And you do indeed claim that no crime was committed in the death of Brown or Foster. Must I quote you AGAIN?
And I also believe evidence has to be PROVED IN A COURT OF LAW to be considered THE TRUTH or THE FACTS.
Wait a minute. I thought you've been claiming all along that it isn't "evidence" UNTIL its been PROVEN TRUE in a court of law? Are you finally agreeing with me that your earlier definition of evidence was bogus? In any case, you are just trying to make up an EXCUSE for not even beginning an investigation. See, folks, Howlin believes the circumstances (satisfied?) in the Ron Brown (and other cases) have to be proven IN COURT before we can even begin to INVESTIGATE the possibility that he was murdered (or other crimes committed). And she somehow seems to think it is Klayman's job to do that, rather than Ashcroft's. Somehow, that just doesn't make any sense ... except perhaps to a democRAT.
340 posted on 11/28/01 2:06 PM Pacific by BeAChooser
Ah yes, and when you order that autopsy, feel free to send him the results and all proof you have. Also, be sure to tell the guilty party's name.
339 posted on 11/28/01 1:58 PM Pacific by Howlin
Not of him, no. I think if someone would just tell him they do not believe Brown was killed, then he'd be happy. The fact that no one will argue with him on that issue, is really taking him to the cleaners.
Not at all democRAT. Just the FACTS.
Wait a minute. I thought you've been claiming all along that it isn't "evidence" UNTIL its been PROVEN TRUE in a court of law?
Can you not see that those are the same exact thing? No wonder you have a problem understanding plain English.
Why don't we stop wasting JimRob's valuable bandwidth? If you don't know my feelings by now, you never will. I know you haven't had many takers, but give it a rest for a bit, and maybe someone will come along and either agree or disagree with you.
No Howlin. They aren't.
EVIDENCE is what is PRESENTED (as your NEW definition and the dictionaries clearly state). Your old definition maintained that it was NOT "evidence" UNTIL it was proven to be true by cross examination. And I notice that you didn't address my statement that you seem to believe we must go to court BEFORE beginning an investigation. That IS why this became an issue in the first place. You don't want an investigation so you kept challenging my use of the words FACT and EVIDENCE in the course of asking for AN INVESTIGATION. I call that MIS-DIRECTION.
I know that's hard for you to grasp -- mainly because it shoots your theories all to hell.
He's done that on his own by 1) Suing his own mother; 2) Attacking our honorable president and his family; and 3) Having you and Miss Print as his defenders, enablers and shills.
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.