Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Coffee,Tea,or Should We Feel Your Pregnant Wifes Breasts Before Throwing You in a Cell attheAirport?
lewrockwell.com ^ | 12/18/2002 | Nicholas Monahan

Posted on 12/21/2002 11:33:05 AM PST by Libertarian Billy Graham

 

Coffee, Tea, or Should We Feel Your Pregnant Wife’s Breasts Before Throwing You in a Cell at the Airport and Then Lying About Why We Put You There?

by Nicholas Monahan

This morning I’ll be escorting my wife to the hospital, where the doctors will perform a caesarean section to remove our first child. She didn’t want to do it this way – neither of us did – but sometimes the Fates decide otherwise. The Fates or, in our case, government employees.

On the morning of October 26th Mary and I entered Portland International Airport, en route to the Las Vegas wedding of one of my best friends. Although we live in Los Angeles, we’d been in Oregon working on a film, and up to that point had had nothing but praise to shower on the city of Portland, a refreshing change of pace from our own suffocating metropolis.

At the security checkpoint I was led aside for the "inspection" that’s all the rage at airports these days. My shoes were removed. I was told to take off my sweater, then to fold over the waistband of my pants. My baseball hat, hastily jammed on my head at 5 AM, was removed and assiduously examined ("Anything could be in here, sir," I was told, after I asked what I could hide in a baseball hat. Yeah. Anything.) Soon I was standing on one foot, my arms stretched out, the other leg sticking out in front of me àla a DUI test. I began to get pissed off, as most normal people would. My anger increased when I realized that the newly knighted federal employees weren’t just examining me, but my 7½ months pregnant wife as well. I’d originally thought that I’d simply been randomly selected for the more excessive than normal search. You know, Number 50 or whatever. Apparently not though – it was both of us. These are your new threats, America: pregnant accountants and their sleepy husbands flying to weddings.

After some more grumbling on my part they eventually finished with me and I went to retrieve our luggage from the x-ray machine. Upon returning I found my wife sitting in a chair, crying. Mary rarely cries, and certainly not in public. When I asked her what was the matter, she tried to quell her tears and sobbed, "I’m sorry...it’s...they touched my breasts...and..." That’s all I heard. I marched up to the woman who’d been examining her and shouted, "What did you do to her?" Later I found out that in addition to touching her swollen breasts – to protect the American citizenry – the employee had asked that she lift up her shirt. Not behind a screen, not off to the side – no, right there, directly in front of the hundred or so passengers standing in line. And for you women who’ve been pregnant and worn maternity pants, you know how ridiculous those things look. "I felt like a clown," my wife told me later. "On display for all these people, with the cotton panel on my pants and my stomach sticking out. When I sat down I just lost my composure and began to cry. That’s when you walked up."

Of course when I say she "told me later," it’s because she wasn’t able to tell me at the time, because as soon as I demanded to know what the federal employee had done to make her cry, I was swarmed by Portland police officers. Instantly. Three of them, cinching my arms, locking me in handcuffs, and telling me I was under arrest. Now my wife really began to cry. As they led me away and she ran alongside, I implored her to calm down, to think of the baby, promising her that everything would turn out all right. She faded into the distance and I was shoved into an elevator, a cop holding each arm. After making me face the corner, the head honcho told that I was under arrest and that I wouldn’t be flying that day – that I was in fact a "menace."

It took me a while to regain my composure. I felt like I was one of those guys in The Gulag Archipelago who, because the proceedings all seem so unreal, doesn’t fully realize that he is in fact being arrested in a public place in front of crowds of people for...for what? I didn’t know what the crime was. Didn’t matter. Once upstairs, the officers made me remove my shoes and my hat and tossed me into a cell. Yes, your airports have prison cells, just like your amusement parks, train stations, universities, and national forests. Let freedom reign.

After a short time I received a visit from the arresting officer. "Mr. Monahan," he started, "Are you on drugs?"

Was this even real? "No, I’m not on drugs."

"Should you be?"

"What do you mean?"

"Should you be on any type of medication?"

"No."

"Then why’d you react that way back there?"

You see the thinking? You see what passes for reasoning among your domestic shock troops these days? Only "whackos" get angry over seeing the woman they’ve been with for ten years in tears because someone has touched her breasts. That kind of reaction – love, protection – it’s mind-boggling! "Mr. Monahan, are you on drugs?" His snide words rang inside my head. This is my wife, finally pregnant with our first child after months of failed attempts, after the depressing shock of the miscarriage last year, my wife who’d been walking on a cloud over having the opportunity to be a mother...and my anger is simply unfathomable to the guy standing in front of me, the guy who earns a living thanks to my taxes, the guy whose family I feed through my labor. What I did wasn’t normal. No, I reacted like a drug addict would’ve. I was so disgusted I felt like vomiting. But that was just the beginning.

An hour later, after I’d been gallantly assured by the officer that I wouldn’t be attending my friend’s wedding that day, I heard Mary’s voice outside my cell. The officer was speaking loudly, letting her know that he was planning on doing me a favor... which everyone knows is never a real favor. He wasn’t going to come over and help me work on my car or move some furniture. No, his "favor" was this: He’d decided not to charge me with a felony.

Think about that for a second. Rapes, car-jackings, murders, arsons – those are felonies. So is yelling in an airport now, apparently. I hadn’t realized, though I should have. Luckily, I was getting a favor, though. I was merely going to be slapped with a misdemeanor.

"Here’s your court date," he said as I was released from my cell. In addition, I was banned from Portland International for 90 days, and just in case I was thinking of coming over and hanging out around its perimeter, the officer gave me a map with the boundaries highlighted, sternly warning me against trespassing. Then he and a second officer escorted us off the grounds. Mary and I hurriedly drove two and a half hours in the rain to Seattle, where we eventually caught a flight to Vegas. But the officer was true to his word – we missed my friend’s wedding. The fact that he’d been in my own wedding party, the fact that a once in a lifetime event was stolen from us – well, who cares, right?

Upon our return to Portland (I’d had to fly into Seattle and drive back down), we immediately began contacting attorneys. We aren’t litigious people – we wanted no money. I’m not even sure what we fully wanted. An apology? A reprimand? I don’t know. It doesn’t matter though, because we couldn’t afford a lawyer, it turned out. $4,000 was the average figure bandied about as a retaining fee. Sorry, but I’ve got a new baby on the way. So we called the ACLU, figuring they existed for just such incidents as these. And they do apparently...but only if we were minorities. That’s what they told us.

In the meantime, I’d appealed my suspension from PDX. A week or so later I got a response from the Director of Aviation. After telling me how, in the aftermath of 9/11, most passengers not only accept additional airport screening but welcome it, he cut to the chase:

"After a review of the police report and my discussions with police staff, as well as a review of the TSA’s report on this incident, I concur with the officer’s decision to take you into custody and to issue a citation to you for disorderly conduct. That being said, because I also understand that you were upset and acted on your emotions, I am willing to lift the Airport Exclusion Order...."

Attached to this letter was the report the officer had filled out. I’d like to say I couldn’t believe it, but in a way, I could. It’s seemingly becoming the norm in America – lies and deliberate distortions on the part of those in power, no matter how much or how little power they actually wield.

The gist of his report was this: From the get go I wasn’t following the screener’s directions. I was "squinting my eyes" and talking to my wife in a "low, forced voice" while "excitedly swinging my arms." Twice I began to walk away from the screener, inhaling and exhaling forcefully. When I’d completed the physical exam, I walked to the luggage screening area, where a second screener took a pair of scissors from my suitcase. At this point I yelled, "What the %*&$% is going on? This is &*#&$%!" The officer, who’d already been called over by one of the screeners, became afraid for the TSA staff and the many travelers. He required the assistance of a second officer as he "struggled" to get me into handcuffs, then for "cover" called over a third as well. It was only at this point that my wife began to cry hysterically.

There was nothing poetic in my reaction to the arrest report. I didn’t crumple it in my fist and swear that justice would be served, promising to sacrifice my resources and time to see that it would. I simply stared. Clearly the officer didn’t have the guts to write down what had really happened. It might not look too good to see that stuff about the pregnant woman in tears because she’d been humiliated. Instead this was the official scenario being presented for the permanent record. It doesn’t even matter that it’s the most implausible sounding situation you can think of. "Hey, what the...godammit, they’re taking our scissors, honey!" Why didn’t he write in anything about a monkey wearing a fez?

True, the TSA staff had expropriated a pair of scissors from our toiletries kit – the story wasn’t entirely made up. Except that I’d been locked in airport jail at the time. I didn’t know anything about any scissors until Mary told me on our drive up to Seattle. They’d questioned her about them while I was in the bowels of the airport sitting in my cell.

So I wrote back, indignation and disgust flooding my brain.

"[W]hile I’m not sure, I’d guess that the entire incident is captured on video. Memory is imperfect on everyone’s part, but the footage won’t lie. I realize it might be procedurally difficult for you to view this, but if you could, I’d appreciate it. There’s no willful disregard of screening directions. No explosion over the discovery of a pair of scissors in a suitcase. No struggle to put handcuffs on. There’s a tired man, early in the morning, unhappily going through a rigorous procedure and then reacting to the tears of his pregnant wife."

Eventually we heard back from a different person, the guy in charge of the TSA airport screeners. One of his employees had made the damning statement about me exploding over her scissor discovery, and the officer had deftly incorporated that statement into his report. We asked the guy if he could find out why she’d said this – couldn’t she possibly be mistaken? "Oh, can’t do that, my hands are tied. It’s kind of like leading a witness – I could get in trouble, heh heh." Then what about the videotape? Why not watch that? That would exonerate me. "Oh, we destroy all video after three days."

Sure you do.

A few days later we heard from him again. He just wanted to inform us that he’d received corroboration of the officer’s report from the officer’s superior, a name we didn’t recognize. "But...he wasn’t even there," my wife said.

"Yeah, well, uh, he’s corroborated it though."

That’s how it works.

"Oh, and we did look at the videotape. Inconclusive."

But I thought it was destroyed?

On and on it went. Due to the tenacity of my wife in making phone calls and speaking with relevant persons, the "crime" was eventually lowered to a mere citation. Only she could have done that. I would’ve simply accepted what was being thrown at me, trumped up charges and all, simply because I’m wholly inadequate at performing the kowtow. There’s no way I could have contacted all the people Mary did and somehow pretend to be contrite. Besides, I speak in a low, forced voice, which doesn’t elicit sympathy. Just police suspicion.

Weeks later at the courthouse I listened to a young DA awkwardly read the charges against me – "Mr. Monahan...umm...shouted obscenities at the airport staff...umm... umm...oh, they took some scissors from his suitcase and he became...umm...abusive at this point." If I was reading about it in Kafka I might have found something vaguely amusing in all of it. But I wasn’t. I was there. Living it.

I entered a plea of nolo contendere, explaining to the judge that if I’d been a resident of Oregon, I would have definitely pled "Not Guilty." However, when that happens, your case automatically goes to a jury trial, and since I lived a thousand miles away, and was slated to return home in seven days, with a newborn due in a matter of weeks...you get the picture. "No Contest" it was. Judgment: $250 fine.

Did I feel happy? Only $250, right? No, I wasn’t happy. I don’t care if it’s twelve cents, that’s money pulled right out of my baby’s mouth and fed to a disgusting legal system that will use it to propagate more incidents like this. But at the very least it was over, right? Wrong.

When we returned to Los Angeles there was an envelope waiting for me from the court. Inside wasn’t a receipt for the money we’d paid. No, it was a letter telling me that what I actually owed was $309 – state assessed court costs, you know. Wouldn’t you think your taxes pay for that – the state putting you on trial? No, taxes are used to hire more cops like the officer, because with our rising criminal population – people like me – hey, your average citizen demands more and more "security."

Finally I reach the piece de resistance. The week before we’d gone to the airport my wife had had her regular pre-natal checkup. The child had settled into the proper head down position for birth, continuing the remarkable pregnancy she’d been having. We returned to Portland on Sunday. On Mary’s Monday appointment she was suddenly told, "Looks like your baby’s gone breech." When she later spoke with her midwives in Los Angeles, they wanted to know if she’d experienced any type of trauma recently, as this often makes a child flip. "As a matter of fact..." she began, recounting the story, explaining how the child inside of her was going absolutely crazy when she was crying as the police were leading me away through the crowd.

My wife had been planning a natural childbirth. She’d read dozens of books, meticulously researched everything, and had finally decided that this was the way for her. No drugs, no numbing of sensations – just that ultimate combination of brute pain and sheer joy that belongs exclusively to mothers. But my wife is also a first-time mother, so she has what is called an "untested" pelvis. Essentially this means that a breech birth is too dangerous to attempt, for both mother and child. Therefore, she’s now relegated to a c-section – hospital stay, epidural, catheter, fetal monitoring, stitches – everything she didn’t want. Her natural birth has become a surgery.

We’ve tried everything to turn that baby. Acupuncture, chiropractic techniques, underwater handstands, elephant walking, moxibustion, bending backwards over pillows, herbs, external manipulation – all to no avail. When I walked into the living room the other night and saw her plaintively cooing with a flashlight turned onto her stomach, yet another suggested technique, my heart almost broke. It’s breaking now as I write these words.

I can never prove that my child went breech because of what happened to us at the airport. But I’ll always believe it. Wrongly or rightly, I’ll forever think of how this man, the personification of this system, has affected the lives of my family and me. When my wife is sliced open, I’ll be thinking of him. When they remove her uterus from her abdomen and lay it on her stomach, I’ll be thinking of him. When I visit her and my child in the hospital instead of having them with me here in our home, I’ll be thinking of him. When I assist her to the bathroom while the incision heals internally, I’ll be thinking of him.

There are plenty of stories like this these days. I don’t know how many I’ve read where the writer describes some breach of civil liberties by employees of the state, then wraps it all up with a dire warning about what we as a nation are becoming, and how if we don’t put an end to it now, then we’re in for heaps of trouble. Well you know what? Nothing’s going to stop the inevitable. There’s no policy change that’s going to save us. There’s no election that’s going to put a halt to the onslaught of tyranny. It’s here already – this country has changed for the worse and will continue to change for the worse. There is now a division between the citizenry and the state. When that state is used as a tool against me, there is no longer any reason why I should owe any allegiance to that state.

And that’s the first thing that child of ours is going to learn.

December 21, 2002

Nick Monahan works in the film industry. He writes out of Los Angeles where he lives with his wife and as of December 18th, his beautiful new son.

Copyright © 2002 LewRockwell.com

     

 

Back to LewRockwell.com Home Page



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: policestate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 801-820821-840841-860 ... 1,141-1,147 next last
To: EricOKC
Let's turn it around again. This is my car, not yours, and one of the conditions for riding in my car is that you consent to a breathalyzer test. And by the way, here are some nice men from the government to administer it to you. Of course, you don't have to take it, but I'm not going to let you ride in my car if you don't. You can just go get your own car if you object, and drive yourself instead.
821 posted on 12/22/2002 12:24:02 PM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 817 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Random searches by the government without profiling (probably cause!) are illegal. Absolutely, totally illegal. The government is interfering between customers and airlines. The airlines are going out of business because they are unable to respond intelligently to the threat posed by terrorism; instead, they're having to be party to strip-searching Grandma. So you see, what you advocate doesn't work, is throwing the baby out with the bath water, and is illegal. And the most objectionable thing about it is that we--customers and citizens--have no way to petition our government for redress of these grievances.

The terrorists can get right through these searches, and will, whenever they decide the time is right.
822 posted on 12/22/2002 12:24:26 PM PST by ChemistCat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 819 | View Replies]

To: general_re
I really doubt there are 300 tank battalions in the entire US Armed Forces, let alone the National Guard....

To put this into perspective...

The Army's mechanized divisions are built on mechanized infantry and armored brigades. An armored brigade has three armored battalions. The mech infantry brigade has three mech infantry battalions.

A typical armored division will have two armored brigades and one mech infantry brigade. That means that the divison will consist of 6 armored battalions and 3 mech infantry battalions. The proportions are reversed in a mech infantry division.

Taking this claim at face value, Libertarian Billy Graham is claiming that there are enough National Guard tank battalions to equip either 50 armored divisions, 100 mech infantry divisions, or a "balanced force" of 67 armored divisons and 33 mech infantry divisions.

The active army consists of 10 divisions. One division is an airborne division (the 82nd), one division is an air assault division (the 101st), two divisions are light infantry (the 10th and 25th), one is a "heavy" leg infantry division (the 2nd), three are mech infantry (1st, 3rd, and 4th Mech Infantry Divisions) and 2 are armored divisions (the 1st Armored and the 1st Cavalry).

Somehow, I don't think Libertarian Billy Graham has his facts straight.

823 posted on 12/22/2002 12:25:00 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
Weren't we attacked by interstate flights? Yes, of course.
824 posted on 12/22/2002 12:26:02 PM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 793 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
IntrA-state flights are not border concerns.
825 posted on 12/22/2002 12:27:25 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 824 | View Replies]

To: EricOKC
Why is it that only people in fly-over country seem to understand this basic concept? Is there something in the water on the coasts? The only people who seem unable to grasp the concept seem to come from California and the northeast.

Well, we're nearing 1000 posts and so far none of the midwest "real" conservatives have told us what their plan is for airplane security. As near as I can tell, the only constitutionally acceptible plan is to let anyone on a plane with a weapon. The armed good guys on the plane will always outnumber the bad guys, and in the ensuing gunfight at 30,000 feet EricOKC and his buddies will always prevail.

Under this constitutionally acceptible system, groups of trained Muslim commandos could buy tickets onto any flight, carrying firearms in plain sight, and the PRIVATE airline would have no option to search or disarm them (4th and 2nd ammendments, prior restraint, all that stuff.)

Likewise, they could carry bombs under their cloths, and without a reason to search them, their unrestricted right to travel would force the PRIVATE airline to seat them.

Metal detectors cannot be used because that is a "search", as surely as patting down a "pregnant" woman. A search warrant would be needed to make someone go through a metal detector.

Yeah, it must be the water here in California. I would prefer not to share an airplane with armed Muslim commandos or sit next to a woman with a Burka Bomb like the ones they used in Moscow. Even if EricOKC is there to protect me.

So EricOKC, maybe I have it wrong. Please tell me what you would do, that is acceptible under the constitution, to keep terrorist commandos and bombers off the planes. If you don't have a better plan then just admit it. Stop dancing around the issue. What would YOU do?

Baa Baa.

826 posted on 12/22/2002 12:30:01 PM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 776 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Well, you can do that if you wish, if you can get the government to administer those tests. And, since it is your car, you have every right to insist on what terms your passengers must accept if they are going to ride in it. It is your car, just as the planes the airlines own are their planes. And, since they are involved in interstate commerce from virtually every commercial airport, the government has an interest in them. We have the FAA issuing regulations to the airlines regarding safety. No commercial plane carrying passengers can fly without using the ATC system. And nobody gets on a plane without passing through security. Those are the rules, as enacted by our elected representatives. We, the people, have decided, through those representatives that those who wish to fly on the airlines must go through a security screening. We, the people, have decided that such searches are "reasonable," so the 4th Amendment no longer applies. You don't like the searches. So, you have a perfect way to avoid them. Simply do not go to the airport to take a flight. You will not be screened. You will not be searched. You can travel some other way. And it's not just airports. Go to a military base. To enter it, you will pass through a guarded gate, in front of which is a sign informing you that all persons and vehicles may be searched. Don't like it? Turn around and leave. Your rights are not absolute.
827 posted on 12/22/2002 12:32:57 PM PST by MineralMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 821 | View Replies]

To: ChemistCat
You'll note that there have been no further hijackings of US Airliners in this country since 9/11/01. So, apparently the terrorists are _not_ getting through. You _say_ they can, but such has not occurred.
828 posted on 12/22/2002 12:34:29 PM PST by MineralMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 822 | View Replies]

To: ChemistCat
Random searches by the government without profiling (probably cause!) are illegal.

Profiling based on race or ethnicity is illegal. A checkpoint stopping people and checking their sobriety while on the road is perfectly legal, so long as is is reasonably effective in detecting and preventing impaired driving, and it is minimally intrusive to the driver. It's hardly a stretch to extend that to preventing weapons from being brought on to airplanes.

829 posted on 12/22/2002 12:34:53 PM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 822 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
Yes they are. There is no difference in the threat posed to us by intra-state flights versus international flights. They are all international airports. I see airports as no different than any other port. It is airport security, not security for each flight based on where it is going. It makes no difference whether you are headed to Boulder or Bangladesh. It is still a port, where planes takeoff that are capable of being hijacked and taken. What possible difference does it make where your plane was headed?
830 posted on 12/22/2002 12:36:39 PM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 825 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Your rights are not absolute.

Getting an admission of such is like pulling teeth, however...

831 posted on 12/22/2002 12:37:58 PM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 827 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I suspected as much, but I wanted some sort of confirmation from someone who had a better chance than me of knowing what they were talking about ;)
832 posted on 12/22/2002 12:40:35 PM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 823 | View Replies]

To: general_re
"Your rights are not absolute.

Getting an admission of such is like pulling teeth, however..."

The libertarian cannot admit such a thing. To do so is to refute the entire philosophy. Libertarianism rejects society as an entity. It must. Otherwise, some sort of societal rules must be accepted.

Myself, I'd be perfectly happy if all the libertarians moved to some state like Idaho and set up their own country. They could abolish government there and go about their individual lives however they chose. Of course, they'd have to compensate those already living there.
833 posted on 12/22/2002 12:44:10 PM PST by MineralMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 831 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
My bet: Idaho would look like Heinlein's Coventry inside of a year.
834 posted on 12/22/2002 1:14:49 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 833 | View Replies]

To: paul51
With that said, I can't help but feel the guys' whole life (and his wife's) would be a lot less dramatic if he learned how to control himself a little more.

Or more accurately, If he would learn to let OTHERS control him a little more.

835 posted on 12/22/2002 1:17:41 PM PST by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
I would fly naked to prevent that from ever happening again.

Wouldn't you rather fly armed? Submission to authority is no guarantee of safety.

836 posted on 12/22/2002 1:26:04 PM PST by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Or more accurately, If he would learn to let OTHERS control him a little more.

He's already given the airport screeners the power to create a breech pre-birth condition in his wife. Just ask him. They will be the cause of every hangnail he gets from here on out.

837 posted on 12/22/2002 1:28:31 PM PST by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 835 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
I was clarifying the evasive meaning of your speech, not his.

2 days ago I was told my a security screener to "move to china" if I didn't like my treatment.

838 posted on 12/22/2002 1:32:03 PM PST by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 837 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Having flown 17 times in the past year, and having done so on extremely short notice (meaning that I get pulled for a detailed screen every time), I have yet to see anything resembling the horror stories I've heard on Free Republic.

So I'm a wee bit skeptical.

839 posted on 12/22/2002 1:39:57 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 838 | View Replies]

To: Libertarian Billy Graham
After reading the posts to this article, can anyone doubt that the idea of Socialism is triumphant in our time?

The Russian variant failed; the German variant failed; the Cambodian model failed; but the good ol' American model shows the world who the best people in the world are--Americans!

Americans are just plain superior to other people--that's why American Socialism will succeed while others failed miserably.

Get down on your knees and thank God for the ever-watchful Guardians of American Freedom...
...and Socialism. It's the American Way.

On a less sarcastic note, let me speculate that this evident bifurcation in attitudes towards 'authority' is the reason why prisoners are not taken in civil wars.
840 posted on 12/22/2002 1:40:50 PM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 801-820821-840841-860 ... 1,141-1,147 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson