Free Republic

If anyone, repeat ANYONE, yells "allah akbar" before, during and/or after (as applicable) murdering others, the act is, BY DEFINITION, an act of islamoscum terrorism.

Rhetorical question: If, due to the fact that smallpox would kill large numbers of folks, it was felt necessary to wipe smallpox out, why is it not logical to wipe out any organism which is trying to kill large numbers of folks, like islamoscum?

It's almost amusing to hear the debate over intentions, is it terrorism, etc., etc., etc.!

If someone yells "allah akbar" before, during and/or after slaughtering any number of folks, like this islamoscum did, the act is, by definition, islamoscum terrorism.

Does anyone other than an islamoscum murderer say this before, during and/or after the murderous act? It was an islamoscum who hacked Nick Berg's head off while he and the islamoscum in the background all yelled "allah akbar", and recent history is repleat with myriad additional examples of islamoscum perpetrating their heinous "stupid muslim death tricks" along with yelling "allah akbar".

Islmoscum, like smallpox, have the goal of wiping out great numbers of human beings; islamoscum, like smallpox, need to be wiped out pre-emptively.

Q.E.D.

OK, try THIS:

Apparently (this has cleared "rumor control"), one of the reasons we haven't developed our own resources is that there's some kind of agreement with foreign oil-producers to pay down the US debt with part of their mountainous petroleum income.

Supposedly, along with his military threat, Saddam refused to pay his fair share, and that was part of the reason for not tolerating Iraqi aggression while Darfur continues unabated.

Hey, I said it had cleared "rumor control" - unfortunately I can't vouch for them - the source(s) appear reputable, however, so I'm reserving judgment; I'm gonna hafta check further before deciding whethr to give this story any credence.

"Another conspiracy nut job" you think? Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not really out to get me!! Besides, I just thought it was interesting.....

:^D

Roger that!!

One of the many reasons I live in Texas is I get to defend myself, my neighbor, my property, my neighbor's property, and as long as I use at least a little common sense and good judgment I don't have to worry about gun-grabbing sob sisters trying to prosecute ME instead of the perps!

I really like my CZ PO1!!

"Fantastic" Autobahns, roger!! What a gas (no pun intended) to know that the speed limit was how fast your vehicle would go!!

Some of the fun has gone out of the Autobahns, as I understand it; I've been told by folks who have lived there more recently than I (which was "back in the day" - HA!) they are imposing speed limits in many places.....shucks!

I'll never forget screaming (the engine was, literally, "screaming") along in my 225 cu in slant six Dodge at a mighty 110 mph (wouldn't go any faster, darn it!) and being passed by (1) a BMW 3.0 CSI (logo on right side of trunk lid), (2) one car-length behind the BMW a Nissan 240Z and (3) two carlengths behing the "Z" a four-door Mercedes (logo on LEFT side of trunk lid). These cars passed SO quickly that I didn't have time to scan to the side of the Mercedes trunk lid to see what model it was.

I was IMPRESSED!!!

Interesting idea, at least for someone with significant resources at their disposal; perhaps one of the larger conservative legal foundations might be interested.

For the average middle-cleass individual, however, one would simply be inviting an onslaught of "clintonista-like" attacks, starting with the IRS and getting worse from there. After all, when they are wrong, the action they take is to attack their accusers on "stuff created out of whole cloth" (the politics of personal destruction).

So my PERSONAL options regarding meeting the obligations of "the oath" are extrememly limited; they would, however, by extremely effective if I could get past my conscience and my responsibilites to my family!!

:^D

Thanks for refreshing my memory!

As I recall, the plant was comissioned based on technology Ike brought back from Germany which was attempting to develop means to generate fuel for their motorized forces (both ground and air); they were running out of petroleum as the war "progressed".

Ike brought a WHOLE bunch of technology and ideas back from Germany after WWII, a highly visible example being the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System patterned after the German Autobahns!

I know for a fact that the US had technology back in the 1950's to make gasoline from some non-petroleum substance (I think it was coal), but then President Eisenhower shut the prototype plant down in response to a powerful petroleum lobby (no, I'm NOT slamming "big oil"; I'm merely reciting un-revised history).

The prototype plant was producing a respectable volumn (I forget the number of gallons per day, but it was significant), and the technology was thus proven viable.

Whatever the technology, at the time Eisenhower shut it down petroleum was cheap, so in that context it may not have been a bad decision. Today, however, it would seem that this successful project should be resurected with a vengence.

This would, of course, be unacceptable to liberal, socialist dummycraps in their on-going effort to destroy the middle class in good ol' USA!

"Domestic Enemies" (note both words capitalized), roger!!

I've taken "the oath" to "protect....from enemies, both foreign and domestic" three times; once when I enlisted, once when I accepted a commission, and once when I went on civil service. I have never gone through any process, nor do I believe a legitimate means exists, to relieve me of my responsibilities regarding said oath, so just how am I supposed to fulfill my sworn obligation??

I sure as hades have a list of clear, seditious, treasonous, liberal socialist dummycrap "domestic enemies", and I know where they are, but what am I supposed to do about it? The simplest answer might be an armed uprising, but that's largely illegal as well as logically undesirable, so the only thing left is the vote. Some say, however, if the vote REALLY meant anything, "they" would have outlawed it years ago.....

:^D

No problem getting mine here in Texas! What's your "paper trail" look like? (J/K)

Seriously, though, you're not allowed to carry in a bar in Texas; it's illegal to carry in any establishment which makes over half of their income by selling alcoholic beverages. You can tell which ones these are, because they are mandated by the state to have a "51%" sign prominiently displayed.

I guess it's a good thing Nevada is a tad different. Of course, in my opinion, any "gun-free zone" is nothing more than a soft target; perhaps we need "designated carriers", or "bar marshalls" (like "air marshalls")?

:^D

Are you sure they are actually "awarding" the purple heart for PTSD?

The Air Force and Navy Times newspapers are running articles about CONSIDERING this, but I was not aware that a decision had been made, one way or the other.

My opinion, whatever little it's worth, is that this is bogus; I have a son-in-law, an Air Force PJ (combat EMT) who was badly injured in a CH-47 crash in Afghanistan and, since it was due to equipment failure, not direct enemy action (although the reason they were in the air WAS as a direct result of enemy action), he does not get a Purple Heart. You oughtta see his scars and the xrays of the number of bones they put back together with titanium rods!!

Not only that, but he was so busted up after the crash that couldn't help a fellow serviceman who was begging for my son-in-law's help, by name, as he died; my son-in-law was forced to lay there in the wreckage and listen to his buddy pass away. What a bi*ch!

....but no Purple Heart....

My initial thought upon the announcement of this murderer's cancer was that he was finally gonna meet up with Mary Jo - Wherever she is, I trust she'll at least wave at him as he descends past her to remind him of at least one of the things he's done to earn his final "reward"!

What a total scum-bag!

Didn't you mean to say, "Do not mock [the complete, utter farse of] global warming."??

There is certainly no fact to support GW, or AGW; there is only hard, scientific data to support that there are cycles in the life of good ol' mother earth and we are so far inside the maximums (and minimums) of "observed" numbers presented by said cycles over the past several millenia that any concern over our current situation is mere "chicken-little panic mongering"!!

Suspend all thought! This way one can accept the existence of AGW, one can accept darwinism as more than a badly flawed theory, one can accept islamics being open to negotiation/compromise, one can accept gov't making more money for the treasury by increasing taxes, one can accept making everyone defenseless (taking guns away from law-abiding citizens) will decrease violent crime.....gosh, the number of lies one could fall for is as ongoing as this sentence!

OUTSTANDING!!

Your cartoon says it VERY WELL!!

So, Antarctica isn't affected by global change? Last I checked, it WAS part of the ecosphere!

These GW chicken-little panic mongerers are a hoot! In 1974 these same people were obsessing over global cooling. In any case, their data is faulty at best and more idiotic than "junk science" at worst.

Depending on the source, temperatures have been stable or decreasing over the last three to 9 years. Whateverthecase, the Arctic ice cap is larger this year than any other in recorded history (ice cap measurements go back approximately 200 years), snow levels in the Rocky mountains are WAY above normal, there are 35 egregious errors (or lies) in Gore's movie, current temperatures are significantly below those of the midieval times (a period of unparalleled growth and prosperity), and the litany of data showing the "concern" of the chicken-little panic mongerers is totally and uterly unfounded goes on and on (like this sentence).

Note that as temperatures were rising here on earth in the 80's and 90's, the caps on Mars were also shrinking, proving unequivocally that temperature increases are the result of activity on the sun, something on which mankind has no impact. My SUV makes no difference to temperatures on earth; neither does cow flatus!! The fact is that carbon dioxide DOES increase with temperature, but lags the temperature curve by about 300 years. Temperature causes carbon dioxide, not the opposite. Idiots!

The whole premise of GW requires the suspension of logical thought, or ANY thought, for that matter. It's the same lack of thought required to accept current, ongoing lies, for example, darwinism is more than a badly flawed theory, islamics are open to negotiation, increasing taxes makes more money for the gov't, making everyone defenseless (taking guns away from law-abiding citizens) decreases violent crime, and any number of other easily disproven hypotheses!

There, THAT ought to liven things up a bit!

Meaning no disrespect, I am reminded of the kid's riddle:

"What kind of movies do pirates watch?"

"Aaarrrrgh-rated", of course!

My thoughts, exactly!

Usually this type of "over-protest" is due to a guilty conscience. Clearly, since BHO has espoused "talking" as his preferred course of action and, just as clearly, since the islamoscum have repeatedly stated their unwillingness to discuss the matter or compromise in any way, BHO is just a "black" Chamberlain.

This clueless socialist dummycrap, along with Pelosi, Reid, Biden, Clinton, et.al., is a danger to the general safety and well-being of western civilization. At least McCain understands the existence of an enemy; too bad about some of his other stands, but in the context of BHO and hitlary.....

A 9th reason not to vote for McCain is to insure the democrat candidate gets elected!

I don't like McCain any better than any other "open border" north american union big government puke, but McCain will only make me angry, not suspend the defense of the country against the islamic religious war or any number of OTHER liberal-socialist dummycrap agenda items.

I don't like McCain, but I FEAR what the dummycraps will do to this country (GUARANTEED far worse than what we expect McCain will do)!

Oh, well; maybe there is some truth to the position that, "If the vote REALLY meant anything, it would have been outlawed years ago!"

:^)

Exactly! As a matter of undeniable FACT, something the GW chicken-little panic mongerers love to ignore, when the ice caps on Earth were shrinking, so were the caps on Mars. Global warming is driven by solar activity which, last time I checked with my commonsense meter, is NOT affected by my SUV, or cow flatus, or any other asinine thing (pun sort-of intended).

Additionally, as was posted on FR some days agao, it is a FACT that temperatures, which were never as high as during midieval times have, for the last three years, stopped increasing and are level or have been dropping (depending on the source). Seems like the current global warming "thing" is nothing more than the same idiocy which, in 1974, caused the chicken-little panic mongerers to be crying and gnashing their teeth over global COOLING!

This year, the Antarctic ice mass is larger in area than any other time since it was measured (they started keeping track about 200 years ago). The snow melt from the Rocky Mountains is going to be WAY above normal to the point that anticipation of flooding is occurring. There are 35 egregious errors, or lies (depending on whether you believe Gore actually believes his BS), in his verdamt "movie". The incontrovertible FACT (there I go again) is that man has no significant impact on global warming.

To support "manmade" global warming requires the suspension of thought, the same as required to be a liberal-socialist democrat, a darwinist, someone who denies the WWII holocaust, someone who thinks there is no islamic holy war on anyone who will not convert to islam, and any number of other falsehoods!

There, THAT ought to sweeten the "discussion" a tad!

"You do not get to define the terms used in Science. Scientists have already done so a long time ago."

Um, this is what I told YOU last time. It appears that you are hampered by your emotion (a common problem within darwinism) which is interfering with your ability to read and understand.

You're wrong about darwinism being proven by ANYTHING scientific; no matter what you think supports the lie of darwinism, in FACT it doesn't. Don't slam me for my position, which I gleaned from principles published and promulgated by myriad THINKING folks within the scientific community, just because you are confused by inference and assumption.

BTW, engineering is applied science; without science, engineering wouldn't exist. For you to tell me I'm not scientific because I'm an engineer is as uninformed a position as is darwinism. Additionally, one of my many academic honor society memberships is in a pure science, so don't make assumptions regarding my scientific qualifications....oh, that's right; you're a darwinist, so your whole thinking process revolves around (baseless) assumption. Oops!

I wonder if you are truly a scientist, because it boggles the mind to think that if you were you would still make such erroneous assertions regarding so-called "proof" of darwinism, a THEORY based soley on (as stated previously) inference and assumption, not scientific fact.

No offense meant; just wondering. This is my last interaction - I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with someone so blinded by inference and assumption that they are only half equipped. BT SK