A Vote For John F'ing Kerry is a Vote For Terrorists...

[c| Spetsnaz.]

 9/11 was a failure; it was not due to incompetence. It was due to the simple fact that not everything can be stopped.

in?com?pe?tent (n-kmp-tnt) adj.

1. Not qualified in legal terms: a defendant who was incompetent to stand trial.

2. Inadequate for or unsuited to a particular purpose or application.

3. Devoid of those qualities requisite for effective conduct or action.

I still think it was due to incompetence, and so does the 9/11 Commission.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Do I not feed them with my tax dollars?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Do I not feed them with my tax dollars?

I highly doubt that you make enough money to have to pay Federal Income Tax.

[Ace]

Do I not feed them with my tax dollars?

I highly doubt that you make enough money to have to pay Federal Income Tax.

How about you stop making unsubstantiated personal attacks and respond to my post? Or are you avoiding me because you know I'm right?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Do I not feed them with my tax dollars?

I highly doubt that you make enough money to have to pay Federal Income Tax.

How about you stop making unsubstantiated personal attacks and respond to my post? Or are you avoiding me because you know I'm right?

Hold on a second, partner.....what exactly did I fail to respond to?

And on another note, I happen to know that Spets is a full-time college student and much of his free time is spent on GameRanger.  So sure, he may have a job, but I doubt he is pulling in the kind of money that would require him to pay Federal Income Tax.  Cause if he is making less than $30,000 a year, he probably isn't paying much, if any.

[Croosch]

If a vote for John Kerry is a vote for terrorists . . . what's a vote for Bush? That's a horrible analogy GS

["Sixhits"]

Do I not feed them with my tax dollars?

I highly doubt that you make enough money to have to pay Federal Income Tax.

How about you stop making unsubstantiated personal attacks and respond to my post? Or are you avoiding me because you know I'm right?

Hold on a second, partner.....what exactly did I fail to respond to?

And on another note, I happen to know that Spets is a full-time college student and much of his free time is spent on GameRanger.  So sure, he may have a job, but I doubt he is pulling in the kind of money that would require him to pay Federal Income Tax.  Cause if he is making less than $30,000 a year, he probably isn't paying much, if any.

As I live and breath - what you pay in taxes doesn't determine your right to demand services, or question the quality thereof. Nor does it lend credence to your arguments if you pay more than others. We succeed or fail in our arguments on the merits of our words and the quality of our ideas. Paying into the system a lot, or a little, or not at all doesn't qualify you, as a citizen. As we all know, we are born into the system, or we work to earn our place.

Money has nothing to do with it. And if I may be the radical leftist that I am, it's this exact sense of entitlement that I dispise about certain conservatives, where it puts down the have nots, or the have not yets, for the benefit of the haves and the have mores.

We are all Americans - that is the start and the end of our quality as citizens.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

As I live and breath - what you pay in taxes doesn't determine your rights. Nor does it lend credence to your arguments if you pay more than others. We succeed or fail in our arguments on the merits of our words and the quality of our ideas. Paying into the system a lot, or a little, or not at all doesn't qualify you, as a citizen. As we all know, we are born into the system, or we work to earn our place.
Money has nothing to do with it. And if I may be the radical leftist that I am, it's this exact sense of entitlement that I dispise about certain conservatives, where it puts down the have nots, or the have not yets, for the benefit of the haves and the have mores.
We are all Americans - that is the start and the end of our quality as citizens.

Sixhits, you need to go back and read the whole argument.  It seems you only got part of the story.  This started when Snipe told Spets not to bite the hand that feeds him and Spets replied that he is the one feeding them with his tax dollars.  Which is where I came in and said that I seriously doubt Spets pays Income Tax, so therefore his argument doesn't hold water.

Thank you.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

[Abe 2.0]

You haven't really responded to anybody's points.....

I'll ask again: How can such a great patriot like yourself have so little respect for the individual freedom and liberty that make America great in the first place? Or maybe you only like the freedom to own firearms..
I guess the rest of the Bill of Rights is BS anyways...

Did everyone see the Simpsons a month or so back, when they get put in a reeducation camp?

[Cobra]

Hold on a second, partner.....what exactly did I fail to respond to?

Ahm, everything, actually.

Here, start with this, if you like:

shit all over parts of the 1st Amendment and pretty much all of the 2nd Amendment

Specifically...?

["Sixhits"]

As I live and breath - what you pay in taxes doesn't determine your rights. Nor does it lend credence to your arguments if you pay more than others. We succeed or fail in our arguments on the merits of our words and the quality of our ideas. Paying into the system a lot, or a little, or not at all doesn't qualify you, as a citizen. As we all know, we are born into the system, or we work to earn our place.
Money has nothing to do with it. And if I may be the radical leftist that I am, it's this exact sense of entitlement that I dispise about certain conservatives, where it puts down the have nots, or the have not yets, for the benefit of the haves and the have mores.
We are all Americans - that is the start and the end of our quality as citizens.

Sixhits, you need to go back and read the whole argument.  It seems you only got part of the story.  This started when Snipe told Spets not to bite the hand that feeds him and Spets replied that he is the one feeding them with his tax dollars.  Which is where I came in and said that I seriously doubt Spets pays Income Tax, so therefore his argument doesn't hold water.

Thank you.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

I did read that. I just thought that questioning his qualification to criticize things because he doesn't put big cash back into the system is misguided.

But, I agree with you that he makes a stupid argument by grounding it in the taxes he pays. Cause really, it's got nothing to do with taxes. Whether you're a newborn baby infant fresh from your mother's womb or a 60 year old billionare you still have the right to criticize the government (tho I think the baby might have a tough time formulating his opinion).

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Hold on a second, partner.....what exactly did I fail to respond to?

Ahm, everything, actually.

Here, start with this, if you like:

shit all over parts of the 1st Amendment and pretty much all of the 2nd Amendment

Specifically...?

Okay, at the time I was under the impression that Ace was a Liberal.  I have since taken a good look at his posts and agree that he is a Libertarian.  It was to being a Liberal that I was saying he would shit all over the 1st and 2nd Amendments (which many liberals do).

Sorry Ace, had you figured wrong.

["Sixhits"]

It was (in regards) to being a Liberal that I was saying he would shit all over the 1st and 2nd Amendments (which many liberals do).

Now when do liberals shit on the 1st Amendment. What with us controling the media and all. And trying to end America by putting a big fat gag on all the public praise for Bush's war. We're all about closing down newspapers, denying protesters the right to assemble, and censorship. Yep.



And the 2nd Amendment is so 1700's New England.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

It was (in regards) to being a Liberal that I was saying he would shit all over the 1st and 2nd Amendments (which many liberals do).

Now when do liberals shit on the 1st Amendment. What with us controling the media and all. And trying to end America by putting a big fat gag on all the public praise for Bush's war. We're all about closing down newspapers, denying protesters the right to assemble, and censorship. Yep.

And the 2nd Amendment is so 1700's New England.

This is the part of the 1st Amendment that Liberals shit all over:[/size][/b]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

As for the 2nd Amendment, you tend to shit on it pretty regularly, too.

["Sixhits"]

What law did liberals make in regards to the establishment of a religion, or that prohibited the free practice.

We might mock religion. We might look down our pointy little noses at those we consider fundamentalists, or foolish, or what-not. But we don't prohibit your practice of faith, nor do we want to, and nor do we stop ppl from establishing new faiths. When the heck did we do that?

We're ALL ABOUT the seperation of Church and State - and that means the government doesn't tell you shit-all in regards to your faith.

As for the 2nd Amendment shitting: yah. It's a favorite toilet of mine.

[c| Spetsnaz.]

Sixhits, you need to go back and read the whole argument.  It seems you only got part of the story.  This started when Snipe told Spets not to bite the hand that feeds him and Spets replied that he is the one feeding them with his tax dollars.  Which is where I came in and said that I seriously doubt Spets pays Income Tax, so therefore his argument doesn't hold water.

Thank you.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

LOL, look at the name of this thread for an argument that does not hold water. So the Govt makes no money from my Federal Student Loans?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

So the Govt makes no money from my Federal Student Loans?

Only if you repay them.  And if you are like most Americans, that will never happen.

[Ace]

Name one, just one, liberty that you have had taken away from YOU PERSONALLY since George Bush has been President.
For me, I havn't seen any of my liberties taken away.

Why don't you shut the fuck up instead?

Oh, I see now.  The liberties you have lost relate to you being able to commit a crime in the privacy of your own home!  Gosh, why didn't you just say that you wanted to be able to commit crimes without the possibility of being caught!  Now I see why the Patriot Act never bothered me....BECAUSE I AM AN UPSTANDING CITIZEN THAT DOES NOT BREAK THE LAW!

Well, guess you need to be scared.  As I said before, I have not lost any of my liberties.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. First, I have lost the liberty to sit in the privacy of my own home without being treated like a criminal. Second, I never said I wanted people to be able to commit crimes without being caught.  Third, and most important, the P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act never bothered you because you have obviously never read the Bill of Rights.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Do you know why we have the Fourth Amendment? It was created so that we would never have to live in fear of an authoritarian government. The P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act violates this in so many damn ways that it's not even funny. Hell, with the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act in place, the government could be monitoring my Internet connection as we speak.

If you are happy being a mindless, subservient bitch to the government, by all means, go bend over for John Ashcroft and Co. You will get it right up the poopshot eventually. But as for me, I'm a patriotic American and I know my fucking rights.

Well GS, you almost got away with it. You almost got me far enough off topic to not notice that you never actually refuted my statement that those in the administration who support the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act are, in fact, as unpatriotic as an American can get.

But then again, you know that silence is consent. I guess by not voicing your discontent with my statement, you tacitly agreed with it. It's nice to know that you have finally come around and realized that the Bush administration is filled with enemies of the state.

I look forward to seeing you vote for Kerry!

[BTs_GhostSniper]

I look forward to seeing you vote for Kerry!

lol...not likely!  As for the rest of your post, I simply didn't remember to reply...it wasn't that I was avoiding it.  I do get busy at work every now and then!  lol

I still don't feel that we have anything to be worried about with the Patriot Act.  It is a means for the government to help track Terrorists.  You are just automatically assuming the government will start using it for other things.  But has that really happened?  I think if the government were using it in a way that it was not meant to be used we would be hearing the media screaming about it every night on TV.  But as yet, that has not been the case.  I will start worrying about it only when the government starts abusing it.  Until then, I say we give the government the benifit of the doubt and allow it to try and keep us safe.

[Cossack]

I hate to sound like some paranoid conspiracy theorist, but you should never trust any government, no matter how virtuous it may seem.

[Ace]

Whether the government is abusing the power is rather irrelevant. (And it is, for the record.) What matters most is that the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act gives the government unconstitutional powers. So, answer the question:

How do you argue that the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is not unconstitutional?

I realize that this is a tough, broad question, so I'll give you something smaller to chew on if you so choose. From the EFF page:

"Be careful what you read on the Internet. The  government may now monitor the online activities of innocent Americans, and  perhaps even track what Web sites you read, by merely telling a judge  anywhere in the U.S. that the spying could lead to information that is "relevant" to an ongoing criminal investigation. The person  spied on does not have to be the target of the investigation. This  application must be granted and the government is not obligated to  report to the court or tell the person spied upon what it has done."

This clearly violates the Fourth Amendment. If you disagree, please explain to me A) how people are secure in their persons against unreasonable search and seizures and B) how this guarantees that no warrant shall be issued but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.