For all the Americans to watch..
Jamie
--
"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"
"Daily Thought:
SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE SLINKIES. NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING BUT
THEY BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE WHEN PUSHED DOWN THE STAIRS.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"
Eeyore
Jamie wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nONjlZ8YMkA
Does Vet mean vetinarian or veteran ?
Is it actually ILLEGAL to fly the Mexican flag ?
Graham
Jamie
No, just not on top of the USA flag.
USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
They were trying to send a message obviously, I'm sure they'll
get all the attention they were looking for.
Richard Henry
It's also illegal to steal someone's property at knifepoint.
Jim Thompson
<jamie_ka1lpa_not_v...@charter.net> wrote:
>Eeyore wrote:
>
>>
>> Jamie wrote:
>>
>>
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nONjlZ8YMkA
>>
>>
>> Does Vet mean vetinarian or veteran ?
>>
>> Is it actually ILLEGAL to fly the Mexican flag ?
>>
>> Graham
>>
>No, just not on top of the USA flag.
> USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
>country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
>
> They were trying to send a message obviously, I'm sure they'll
>get all the attention they were looking for.
It's a miracle the Vet didn't put a few holes in the Mexicans. Note I
said, "Mexicans", NOT "Mexican Flag".
There's bills in several state legislatures to dispense with the
native birth privilege... let the war begin!
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> Just remember... there are plenty of Euro countries that would have
> dispatched a cop to the scene, and the person erecting such a flag over
> the flag of their nation would have been shot by the cop. Period.
Uh ?
Graham
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> >Jamie wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nONjlZ8YMkA
> >
> >Does Vet mean vetinarian or veteran ?
>
> Can you really be that retarded?
In the UK it would mean a vetinary. Our 'vets' are called ex-servicemen.
> >Is it actually ILLEGAL to fly the Mexican flag ?
> >
> >Graham
>
> No, idiot. It is illegal to erect a flag of another nation over top of
> the US Flag, if you are in the US or on US territory.
Felony, misdemeanour etc ? Which is it ?
Graham
Eeyore
Spehro Pefhany wrote:
> You're not supposed to fly it (or any other nation's flag) above (or
> below) a US flag, at least "in time of peace".
>
> http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sec_04_00000007----000-.html
>
> ---
> Are there penalties for violating the Flag Code?
>
> No. The Flag Code (see below) is intended as a guide to be followed on
> a purely voluntary basis to insure proper respect for the flag.
>
> The Flag Code has no provision for enforcement whatsoever. No fines,
> no penalties. There is nothing law enforcement can do when the Flag
> Code is broken. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that violations
> of the Flag Code are protected First Amendment Rights for political
> speech.
So it's not actually ILLEGAL then ?
Wheras theft and damage to property most certainly ARE crimes.
Graham
Don Bowey
ead7a02f-8d98-41bd...@x69g2000hsx.googlegroups.com, "Richard
Henry" <pome...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Nobody is going to arrest him for it.
Don Bowey
"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 19:22:00 -0500, Jamie
> <jamie_ka1lpa_not_v...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Jamie wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nONjlZ8YMkA
>>>
>>>
>>> Does Vet mean vetinarian or veteran ?
>>>
>>> Is it actually ILLEGAL to fly the Mexican flag ?
>>>
>>> Graham
>>>
>> No, just not on top of the USA flag.
>> USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
>> country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
>>
>> They were trying to send a message obviously, I'm sure they'll
>> get all the attention they were looking for.
>
> It's a miracle the Vet didn't put a few holes in the Mexicans. Note I
> said, "Mexicans", NOT "Mexican Flag".
He was angry, not insane
>
> There's bills in several state legislatures to dispense with the
> native birth privilege... let the war begin!
>
> ...Jim Thompson
You're the epitome of the "ugly American."
Jim Thompson
>SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE SLINKIES. NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING BUT
>THEY BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE WHEN PUSHED DOWN THE STAIRS.
I can think of a better version...
Democrats are like Slinkies, not really good for anything, but
they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs ;-)
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> The cops in Spain carry automatic weapons.
>
> If one saw someone trying to erect a flag of another nation over one of
> their own, what do you think his response would be?
Not shoot them for sure.
I don't suppose it's any more ILLEGAL in Europe than in the USA, i.e. not at
all.
Graham
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> He gave his name, right there on the local news station's broadcast.
>
> How much do you want to bet that he was not ever approached by any LEO
> regarding his actions?
>
> Or better, how much bet that he was offered a handshake and a pat on
> the back as opposed to an apprehension?
Apparently it happened a couple of months ago, so presumably we don't need to guess.
" The Reno police department has told krnv that Brossert will faces charges for theft
if the store owner files a police report of what happened. "
http://thevoice.name/?p=3822
Since it's a civil matter that figures. It's down to the store owner.
Graham
Robert Baer
No; one can fly any flag they wish.
Teer are seemlingly obscure regulations (where are they published,
etc) that state where non-US flags can be placed WRT the US flag.
Robert Baer
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 18:14:51 -0500, Jamie
> <jamie_ka1lpa_not_v...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nONjlZ8YMkA
>
>
>
> It was an absolutely perfect response, and I only wish that one of the
> retards that erected would have tried to stop him.
>
> THAT would have been a nice piece of video.
>
> Just remember... there are plenty of Euro countries that would have
> dispatched a cop to the scene, and the person erecting such a flag over
> the flag of their nation would have been shot by the cop. Period.
Oh, but that is "cruel and unusual" punishment; outlawed by the
Constitution and the US Supreme Court.
Richard Henry
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4764A18C...@hotmail.com...
"Charges of theft" is not a civil matter.
Eeyore
Richard Henry wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> > >
> > > How much do you want to bet that he was not ever approached by any LEO
> > > regarding his actions?
> > >
> > > Or better, how much bet that he was offered a handshake and a pat on
> > > the back as opposed to an apprehension?
> >
> > Apparently it happened a couple of months ago, so presumably we don't need
> > to guess.
> >
> > " The Reno police department has told krnv that Brossert will faces
> > charges for theft if the store owner files a police report of what happened. "
> > http://thevoice.name/?p=3822
> >
> > Since it's a civil matter that figures. It's down to the store owner.
>
> "Charges of theft" is not a civil matter.
Without a theft being reported, where's the crime ?
Graham
Richard Henry
How does that make it a civil matter?
Anthony Fremont
> No, just not on top of the USA flag.
> USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
> country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
The exception being Texas. Texas' state flag can be flown on the same level
as the US flag.
radiosrfun
news:13magjj...@news.supernews.com...
WHY? What is so special about Texas?
Jim Thompson
Nothing (except, IIRC, their assholes are bigger :-)
Nothing (actually)... separate flag poles... same height, I BELIEVE is
legal nationwide.
radiosrfun
message news:5eham39af2m8eol38...@4ax.com...
You "could" be right about flag pole height, but I thought - always
heard/understood - that if there were 2 or more flags - (not of all
countries) - a U.S., State, maybe a Municipal/City OR some sort of
Organizational flag - that the U.S. flag had to be "highest", even if only
an inch or so - to show importance.
For example - we have 3 poles - equal height at our Fire Station. The U.S.
flag is flown at the top (middle pole). The State and Fire Department
flags - flown at equal height - but at least an inch lower than the U.S.
Flag (either side of U.S. flag). IF an occasion comes to "lower" the U.S.
flag to "half staff" - then the others are removed or placed even lower.
I'm sure - somewhere - exists a manual of protocol for flag display.
I will say however - it was also my understanding that a U.S. flag should
never fly at night - unlit (no light to shine on it) OR in the rain. As of
recent years - that seems to be wearing away. Lots of flags are flown rain
or shine - and many without illumination at night.
I suppose - so long as we believe in Ole Glory - it really doesn't matter.
Let her fly on - high and proud - regardless.
radiosrfun
news:47654f52$0$30103$ecde...@news.coretel.net...
Though I've never paid strict attention to this stuff, it "seems" to me -
that the flags of the U.N. - are all at equal height.
Being things seem to change with time -
Now my question is - if in a war - such as Iraq, do we raise OUR flag with
the others - Iraq or whoever and if so - at the same height, above it, or
below it? I've never seen examples of that up close. I recall toppling
Sadam's statue and raising some flags - but I can't recall in what order or
other details associated.
John Fields
<To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 10:28:27 -0500, "radiosrfun"
><radio...@radiosrfun.com> wrote:
>
>>"Anthony Fremont" <nob...@noplace.net> wrote in message
>>news:13magjj...@news.supernews.com...
>>> Jamie wrote:
>>>
>>>> No, just not on top of the USA flag.
>>>> USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
>>>> country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
>>>
>>> The exception being Texas. Texas' state flag can be flown on the same
>>> level as the US flag.
>>>
>>
>>WHY? What is so special about Texas?
>>
>>
>
>Nothing (except, IIRC, their assholes are bigger :-)
---
If you recall correctly?
Hmm...
--
JF
donald
wow, more history classes are required for engineering students.
Texas was admitted into the USA by treaty, Texas was an independent
country, (for a short time) so Texas is an equal to the USA.
Most states in the union were purchased or annexed, i.e. Louisiana
Purchase of 1803 from the French [1]. So the US government owns most
states. The Union annexed even Arizona on February 14, 1912. [2]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona
Only the first 13 and Texas were part of the USA by treaty.
donald
John Fields
<jamie_ka1lpa_not_v...@charter.net> wrote:
>Eeyore wrote:
>
>>
>> Jamie wrote:
>>
>>
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nONjlZ8YMkA
>>
>>
>> Does Vet mean vetinarian or veteran ?
>>
>> Is it actually ILLEGAL to fly the Mexican flag ?
>>
>> Graham
>>
>No, just not on top of the USA flag.
> USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
>country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
---
Except for the flag of the Republic of Texas, which flies on an
equal footing with the flag of the US as long as it's flown on a
different staff.
From: http://www.netstate.com/states/symb/flags/tx_flag.htm
---
3100.055. DISPLAY ON FLAGPOLE OR FLAGSTAFF WITH FLAG OF UNITED
STATES. (a) If it is necessary for the state flag and the flag of
the United States to be displayed on the same flagpole or flagstaff,
the United States flag should be above the state flag
(b) If the state flag and the flag of the United States are
displayed on flagpoles or flagstaffs at the same location:
(1) the flags should be displayed on flagpoles or flagstaffs of the
same height;
(2) the flags should be of approximately equal size;
(3) the flag of the United States should be, from the perspective of
an observer, to the left of the state flag;
(4) the flag of the United States should be hoisted before the state
flag is hoisted; and
(5) the state flag should be lowered before the flag of the United
States is lowered.
---
--
JF
Anthony Fremont
It used to be a country (well a republic anyway). Part of the stipulations
of joining the US was that Texas' flag is equal to the US flag and that
Texas has a legal right to secede from the US any time it likes. Though I'd
really like to see what happened if they tried. ;-) Not from Texas myself,
just lived here long enough to have learned these things.
donald
Texas is one of only four states that were independent nations before
becoming a constituent state of the U.S., the others being Vermont,
California and Hawaii.
donald
Anthony Fremont
Maybe it's been a while since he's been inside one. ;-)
Richard Henry
> radiosrfun wrote:
> > "Anthony Fremont" <nob...@noplace.net> wrote in message
> >news:13magjj...@news.supernews.com...
>
> >>Jamie wrote:
>
> >>>No, just not on top of the USA flag.
> >>> USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
> >>>country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
>
> >>The exception being Texas. Texas' state flag can be flown on the same
> >>level as the US flag.
>
> > WHY? What is so special about Texas?
>
> wow, more history classes are required for engineering students.
>
> Texas was admitted into the USA by treaty, Texas was an independent
> country, (for a short time) so Texas is an equal to the USA.
> Most states in the union were purchased or annexed, i.e. Louisiana
> Purchase of 1803 from the French [1]. So the US government owns most
> states. The Union annexed even Arizona on February 14, 1912. [2]
>
> [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona
>
> Only the first 13 and Texas were part of the USA by treaty.
>
> donald- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not entirely. Vermont and Hawaii also came in by treaty.
However, there is no exception for Texas in the US Flag Code (except
maybe in the version printed in Texas).
donald
Any sovereign country can have its flag the same level as any other country.
(I hope that’s a given)
Having a Texas state flag in let's say California, then California laws
would apply.
So, yes in Texas they can fly the US flag and the Texas flag at the same
level.
However, England's embassy can fly their flag the same level as the US
flag. But they do not out of courtesy.
donald
Richard Henry
The Texas State Library disagrees:
"Neither this joint resolution or the ordinance passed by the Republic
of Texas' Annexation Convention gave Texas the right to secede."
http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/annexation/index.html
The whole treaty is short and readable:
http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/annexation/march1845.html
No mention of flags.
MooseFET
wrote:
In the US, the state can act on an unreported crime. Nobody has to
report you to get a speeding ticket. The cop just has to be able to
catch you.
MooseFET
Remember that many would argue "Its not unusual. We do it all the
time".
Eeyore
donald wrote:
> However, England's embassy can fly their flag the same level as the US
> flag. But they do not out of courtesy.
You'll find that *England* doesn't have an embassy. It's the *British* embassy.
Like the USA, the UK is a Union. A Union of four countries rather than states,
of which England is only one.
Graham
Jamie
--
"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"
"Daily Thought:
SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE SLINKIES. NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING BUT
THEY BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE WHEN PUSHED DOWN THE STAIRS.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"
Eeyore
MooseFET wrote:
Yabbut .....
Simply taking something isn't a crime unless there is evidence that it belongs to
someone else and it was taken without their authority. That's why I said the owner would
need to report the loss.
Graham
krw
sci.electronics.design, radio...@radiosrfun.com says...
Texas was one of five states that ware a sovereign countrys before
becoming a US state. There were conditions that were agreed to
upon its becoming a state.
--
Keith
krw
sci.electronics.design, To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-
Site.com says...
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 10:28:27 -0500, "radiosrfun"
> <radio...@radiosrfun.com> wrote:
>
> >"Anthony Fremont" <nob...@noplace.net> wrote in message
> >news:13magjj...@news.supernews.com...
> >> Jamie wrote:
> >>
> >>> No, just not on top of the USA flag.
> >>> USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
> >>> country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
> >>
> >> The exception being Texas. Texas' state flag can be flown on the same
> >> level as the US flag.
> >>
> >
> >WHY? What is so special about Texas?
> >
> >
>
> Nothing (except, IIRC, their assholes are bigger :-)
>
> Nothing (actually)... separate flag poles... same height, I BELIEVE is
> legal nationwide.
If another flag is flown at the same height, it must be positioned
in a certain way (to the right, IIRC).
--
Keith
krw
sci.electronics.design, radio...@radiosrfun.com says...
<snip>
> I'm sure - somewhere - exists a manual of protocol for flag display.
There is. It's not short.
<snip>
--
Keith
krw
sci.electronics.design, radio...@radiosrfun.com says...
Like any foreign embassy, the UN is not on US property.
> Being things seem to change with time -
>
> Now my question is - if in a war - such as Iraq, do we raise OUR flag with
> the others - Iraq or whoever and if so - at the same height, above it, or
> below it? I've never seen examples of that up close. I recall toppling
> Sadam's statue and raising some flags - but I can't recall in what order or
> other details associated.
Depends on how many "friendlies" are around. ;-)
--
Keith
krw
sci.electronics.design, nob...@noplace.net says...
--
Keith
donald
Sorry Graham, I knew that. :-)
donald
Jim Thompson
donald
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 09:35:33 -0700, donald <Don...@dontdoithere.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>radiosrfun wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Anthony Fremont" <nob...@noplace.net> wrote in message
>>>news:13magjj...@news.supernews.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jamie wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>No, just not on top of the USA flag.
>>>>>USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
>>>>>country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
>>>>
>>>>The exception being Texas. Texas' state flag can be flown on the same
>>>>level as the US flag.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>WHY? What is so special about Texas?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>wow, more history classes are required for engineering students.
>>
>>Texas was admitted into the USA by treaty, Texas was an independent
>>country, (for a short time)
>
>
> Whoopie doo.
>
>
>>so Texas is an equal to the USA.
>
>
> Utter bullshit.
>
>
>>Most states in the union were purchased or annexed, i.e. Louisiana
>>Purchase of 1803 from the French [1]. So the US government owns most
>>states.
>
>
> Owns? You're an idiot.
>
>
>>The Union annexed even Arizona on February 14, 1912. [2]
>>
>>[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase
>>[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona
>>
>>Only the first 13 and Texas were part of the USA by treaty.
>>
>
>
> Yes, and now, NONE of them are "owned". They are all equally PART OF
> this country.
>
> Now go look up the word PART in the dictionary.
LOL,
When the Grand Canyon was closed down after the last "train wrek" during
Bush senior, the state of Arizona tried to open it up for the "tourists".
The Feds were going to send it troops to prevent that from happening.
So please explain why the Feds were so anti-tourist.
I would hope this discussion will not degrade to just name calling with
out any facts to backup the claims stated.
( well, ChairmanOfTheBored is now involved, so I'll just stop posting )
donald
Fred Bloggs
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 03:54:52 +0000, Eeyore
> <rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Eeyore wrote:
>>>
>>>>Spehro Pefhany wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>the renowned Eeyore wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Jamie wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nONjlZ8YMkA
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does Vet mean vetinarian or veteran ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Is it actually ILLEGAL to fly the Mexican flag ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Graham
>>>>>
>>>>>You're not supposed to fly it (or any other nation's flag) above (or
>>>>>below) a US flag, at least "in time of peace".
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
>>>>>http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sec_04_00000007----000-.html
>>>>>
>>>>>---
>>>>>Are there penalties for violating the Flag Code?
>>>>>
>>>>>No. The Flag Code (see below) is intended as a guide to be followed on
>>>>>a purely voluntary basis to insure proper respect for the flag.
>>>>>
>>>>>The Flag Code has no provision for enforcement whatsoever. No fines,
>>>>>no penalties. There is nothing law enforcement can do when the Flag
>>>>>Code is broken. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that violations
>>>>>of the Flag Code are protected First Amendment Rights for political
>>>>>speech.
>>>>
>>>>So it's not actually ILLEGAL then ?
>>>>
>>>>Wheras theft and damage to property most certainly ARE crimes.
>>>
>>> He gave his name, right there on the local news station's broadcast.
>>>
>>> How much do you want to bet that he was not ever approached by any LEO
>>>regarding his actions?
>>>
>>> Or better, how much bet that he was offered a handshake and a pat on
>>>the back as opposed to an apprehension?
>>
>>Apparently it happened a couple of months ago, so presumably we don't need to guess.
>>
>>" The Reno police department has told krnv that Brossert will faces charges for theft
>>if the store owner files a police report of what happened. "
>>http://thevoice.name/?p=3822
>>
>>Since it's a civil matter that figures. It's down to the store owner.
>>
>>Graham
>>
>
>
> Sorry, dumbfuck. Theft is NOT a "civil matter" in any of this
> country's states or possessions.
He *is* about the most ignorant thing on two legs:
" Sometimes a victim files a crime report to force an accommodation out
of a miscreant. The detective may be unaware that behind the scenes, the
victim is trying to cut a deal with the suspect in exchange for dropping
the charges. However, the victim does not control this process. All is
not forgiven simply because a thief hastily returns the stolen property
or pays restitution. This neither excuses nor negates the original
criminal act. If a crime can be proven, the case will be submitted for
prosecution. The victim will be forced to testify like any other
witness, despite any quid pro quo arrangement they may have made with
the suspect. The reason for this is simple. Allowing thieves to buy
their way out of culpability for criminal acts undermines our system of
justice and encourages recidivism. When cornered, criminals often try to
make a deal to avoid jail. This simply allows them to cut their losses
in order to steal again when they find a new victim.
By filing a police report, a victim affirms that a crime has been
committed and agrees to cooperate in any subsequent investigation and
prosecution. Some victims file crime reports merely because the
insurance company requires one before they will process a claim. The
victim may know that the thief is most likely a family member or someone
else they have no desire to prosecute. If this is the case, the victim
should communicate this to the detective so that scarce investigative
resources can be better utilized on other cases."
Fred Bloggs
Jim Thompson wrote:
> http://www.usflag.org/flagetiquette.html
>
> http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
>
> http://www.heritage-flag.com/heritage_etiquette.htm
>
> http://www.legion.org/?section=our_flag&subsection=flag_code&content=flag_code
>
>
> ...Jim Thompson
Yep- ya' got just about all the *flag wavers* covered there...see wiki:-)
"Politics
In politics this cliché is frequently employed as a metaphoric
description of patriotism. In this context, it can be a compliment, or,
more often, an insult or of excessive patriotism, or flamboyant
patriotism, or deception. "
Richard Henry
wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 11:30:20 -0500, "radiosrfun"
>
> <radiosr...@radiosrfun.com> wrote:
>
> >Though I've never paid strict attention to this stuff, it "seems" to me -
> >that the flags of the U.N. - are all at equal height.
>
Really? Please provide a picture.
Jim Thompson
wrote:
Ya know, Fred, I'm getting so I despise your sorry ass. Why don't you
go away and suck your thumb, you poor excuse for a human. Why are
Democrats so ANTI everything?
Fred is like a Slinky, not really good for anything, but
he brings a smile to my face when pushed down the stairs ;-)
Try me, Fred, try me.
Michael A. Terrell
>
> http://www.usflag.org/flagetiquette.html
>
> http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
>
> http://www.heritage-flag.com/heritage_etiquette.htm
>
> http://www.legion.org/?section=our_flag&subsection=flag_code&content=flag_code
http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/misc/ourflag/titlepage.htm
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
Michael A. Terrell
>
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:03:12 -0500, Fred Bloggs <nos...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Jim Thompson wrote:
> >> http://www.usflag.org/flagetiquette.html
> >>
> >> http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
> >>
> >> http://www.heritage-flag.com/heritage_etiquette.htm
> >>
> >> http://www.legion.org/?section=our_flag&subsection=flag_code&content=flag_code
> >>
> >>
> >> ...Jim Thompson
> >
> >Yep- ya' got just about all the *flag wavers* covered there...see wiki:-)
> >"Politics
> >In politics this cliché is frequently employed as a metaphoric
> >description of patriotism. In this context, it can be a compliment, or,
> >more often, an insult or of excessive patriotism, or flamboyant
> >patriotism, or deception. "
>
> Ya know, Fred, I'm getting so I despise your sorry ass. Why don't you
> go away and suck your thumb, you poor excuse for a human. Why are
> Democrats so ANTI everything?
>
> Fred is like a Slinky, not really good for anything, but
> he brings a smile to my face when pushed down the stairs ;-)
>
> Try me, Fred, try me.
Come on, Jim. Even Slinkys have mre feelings that the 'dead frog'.
MooseFET
wrote:
> MooseFET wrote:
> > Eeyore wrote:
> > > Richard Henry wrote:
> > > > "Eeyore" wrote
> > > > > ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
>
> > > > > > How much do you want to bet that he was not ever approached by any LEO
> > > > > > regarding his actions?
>
> > > > > > Or better, how much bet that he was offered a handshake and a pat on
> > > > > > the back as opposed to an apprehension?
>
> > > > > Apparently it happened a couple of months ago, so presumably we don't need
> > > > > to guess.
>
> > > > > " The Reno police department has told krnv that Brossert will faces
> > > > > charges for theft if the store owner files a police report of what happened. "
> > > > >http://thevoice.name/?p=3822
>
> > > > > Since it's a civil matter that figures. It's down to the store owner.
>
>
> > > Without a theft being reported, where's the crime ?
>
> > In the US, the state can act on an unreported crime. Nobody has to
> > report you to get a speeding ticket. The cop just has to be able to
> > catch you.
>
> Yabbut .....
>
> Simply taking something isn't a crime unless there is evidence that it belongs to
> someone else and it was taken without their authority. That's why I said the owner would
> need to report the loss.
The police could act in this case if they wanted to. The tape clearly
shows that the person believes that he is taking someone elses
property. In the US that would be enough to get the case into court.
Jamie
Hmm, Maybe there was some material on board that train the FED's don't
want us to know about?, Bio,Nuclear fuel/waste/Missles? Might be
embarrassing if tourists started to get sick?
Just a thought! , I know, I watch to many movies! :)
--
"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"
"Daily Thought:
SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE SLINKIES. NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING BUT
THEY BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE WHEN PUSHED DOWN THE STAIRS.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> >> How much do you want to bet that he was not ever approached by any LEO
> >> regarding his actions?
> >>
> >> Or better, how much bet that he was offered a handshake and a pat on
> >> the back as opposed to an apprehension?
> >
> >Apparently it happened a couple of months ago, so presumably we don't need to guess.
> >
> >" The Reno police department has told krnv that Brossert will faces charges for theft
> >if the store owner files a police report of what happened. "
> >http://thevoice.name/?p=3822
> >
> >Since it's a civil matter that figures. It's down to the store owner.
>
>
> Sorry, dumbfuck. Theft is NOT a "civil matter" in any of this
> country's states or possessions.
Without anyone reporting a theft where's the crime ?
Graham
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> >> "Charges of theft" is not a civil matter.
> >
> >Without a theft being reported, where's the crime ?
>
> Do you think the news piece being BROADCAST was something other than a
> "report", idiot?
What was broadcast was a video showing a guy *taking* a flag.
It's not *THEFT* until it's shown that it wasn't his legally to take.
Graham
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> Oh boy... the old "if no one is there to hear it does a fallen tree
> make any sound?"
>
> You are so full of shit.
No, you are. ALWAYS.
> Remember the Crown Jewels theft?
>
> http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/England-History/ColonelBlood.htm
>
> Are you going to try to tell us that since no one saw the act of
> thievery, that the crown jewels theft was not a crime?
Apparently you can't see that there's NO similarity whatever.
The Crown Jewels are unmistakably the property of The Crown.
Some flag could be anyone's. Ownership needs to be shown (or known) for an offence to have
been committed.
Graham
Eeyore
Fred Bloggs wrote:
> By filing a police report, a victim affirms that a crime has been
> committed
EXACTLY my point.
Thank you for pointing it out to the Big Oaf.
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> You're a goddamned retard.
>
> Despite all the times I have ever said this, you have now confirmed it
> completely as fact.
YOU'RE the one who doesn't understand the legal requirements for a charge of theft it
would seem.
The guy cutting the flag down could have been arrested on *suspicion* of theft, but
without clear proof the flag belonged to someone else, the case would fail.
Graham
Eeyore
ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> donald <Don...@dontdoithere.com> wrote:
>
> >However, England's embassy can fly their flag the same level as the US
> >flag. But they do not out of courtesy.
>
> Not if the embassy is within this country.
As ever you are COMPLETELY WRONG.
It CAN be flown at the same level, simply not *higher*. Similarly neither should
the *US* flag be flown higher in time of peace.
"11. When flags of two or more nations are displayed, they are to be flown from
separate staffs of the same height. The flags should be of approximately equal
size. International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above
that of another nation in time of peace."
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html AND
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sec_04_00000007----000-.html
Graham
Eeyore
Richard Henry wrote:
> ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> > "radiosrfun" wrote:
> >
> > >Though I've never paid strict attention to this stuff, it "seems" to me -
> > >that the flags of the U.N. - are all at equal height.
> >
> > EHHH! Wrong. The US flag is flown higher than the rest.
>
> Really? Please provide a picture.
He's totally lost the plot now !
Graham
Don Bowey
"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:03:12 -0500, Fred Bloggs <nos...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Jim Thompson wrote:
>>> http://www.usflag.org/flagetiquette.html
>>>
>>> http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
>>>
>>> http://www.heritage-flag.com/heritage_etiquette.htm
>>>
>>> http://www.legion.org/?section=our_flag&subsection=flag_code&content=flag_co
>>> de
>>>
>>>
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>
>> Yep- ya' got just about all the *flag wavers* covered there...see wiki:-)
>> "Politics
>> In politics this cliché is frequently employed as a metaphoric
>> description of patriotism. In this context, it can be a compliment, or,
>> more often, an insult or of excessive patriotism, or flamboyant
>> patriotism, or deception. "
>
> Ya know, Fred, I'm getting so I despise your sorry ass. Why don't you
> go away and suck your thumb, you poor excuse for a human. Why are
> Democrats so ANTI everything?
>
> Fred is like a Slinky, not really good for anything, but
> he brings a smile to my face when pushed down the stairs ;-)
>
> Try me, Fred, try me.
You try us all, thoroughly, Thompson.
>
> ...Jim Thompson
Don Bowey
f9593feb-4971-4193...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com,
"MooseFET" <kens...@rahul.net> wrote:
Not likely to happen.
krw
sci.electronics.design, RUB...@crackasmile.org says...
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 10:00:50 -0700, donald <Don...@dontdoithere.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Richard Henry wrote:
> >
> >> On Dec 16, 8:35 am, donald <Don...@dontdoithere.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>radiosrfun wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>"Anthony Fremont" <nob...@noplace.net> wrote in message
> >>>>news:13magjj...@news.supernews.com...
> >>>
> >>>>>Jamie wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>>No, just not on top of the USA flag.
> >>>>>>USA flag is to be on top of all others in this
> >>>>>>country, The state flags are under the USA flag.
> >>>
> >>>>>level as the US flag.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>wow, more history classes are required for engineering students.
> >>>
> >>>Texas was admitted into the USA by treaty, Texas was an independent
> >>>Most states in the union were purchased or annexed, i.e. Louisiana
> >>>Purchase of 1803 from the French [1]. So the US government owns most
> >>>
> >>>[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase
> >>>ersion).
> >>
> >>
> >> [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona
> >>
> >>>Only the first 13 and Texas were part of the USA by treaty.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>- Show quoted text -
> >>
> >>
> >> Not entirely. Vermont and Hawaii also came in by treaty.
> >>
> >> However, there is no exception for Texas in the US Flag Code (except
> >> maybe in the version printed in Texas).
> >
> >Any sovereign country can have its flag the same level as any other country.
> >(I hope that?s a given)
>
> Not here. While IN another country sure. HERE, however, ALL flags
> must be BELOW that of the US nation's flag.
> >
> >Having a Texas state flag in let's say California, then California laws
> >would apply.
> >
> >So, yes in Texas they can fly the US flag and the Texas flag at the same
> >level.
>
> Wrong.
>
> >However, England's embassy can fly their flag the same level as the US
> >flag. But they do not out of courtesy.
> >
>
> Not if the embassy is within this country.
Did anyone ever tell you that you're an idiot? Oh, yeah, it's
Dimbulb. Hint: a foreign embassy *IS* sovereign property of that
country. It is *NOT* US property, by treaty.
--
Keith
krw
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com says...
No, dumb donkey, you refuse to understand that a theft is the
taking of property, not the reporting of that theft.
> The guy cutting the flag down could have been arrested on *suspicion* of theft, but
> without clear proof the flag belonged to someone else, the case would fail.
Wrong. It's unlikely anyone would prosecute without a police
report, but that's an administrative issue not a legal one.
--
Keith
Eeyore
krw wrote:
As long as it's *someone else's* property (and taken without consent), dimwit !
> > The guy cutting the flag down could have been arrested on *suspicion* of theft, but
> > without clear proof the flag belonged to someone else, the case would fail.
>
> Wrong. It's unlikely anyone would prosecute without a police
> report, but that's an administrative issue not a legal one.
Proof of ownership of the item in question is required.
Graham
Eeyore
krw wrote:
> RUB...@crackasmile.org says...
> > donald <Don...@dontdoithere.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >So, yes in Texas they can fly the US flag and the Texas flag at the same
> > >level.
> >
> > Wrong.
> >
> > >However, England's embassy can fly their flag the same level as the US
> > >flag. But they do not out of courtesy.
> >
> > Not if the embassy is within this country.
>
> Did anyone ever tell you that you're an idiot? Oh, yeah, it's
> Dimbulb. Hint: a foreign embassy *IS* sovereign property of that
> country. It is *NOT* US property, by treaty.
Still entirely irrelevant to the fact that the US flag cannot be flown higher than
that of any other country except in times of war.
Graham
radiosrfun
news:4765B6AA...@hotmail.com...
Well, "I" wasn't sure of the flags at the U.N. - I should have posed it as a
question. I said it "seemed" to be - they were all at the same height. That
based on views I had seen - but never up close. So - are they or aren't
they? Now I am asking.
Eeyore
radiosrfun wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Richard Henry wrote:
> >> ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:
> >> > "radiosrfun" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >Though I've never paid strict attention to this stuff, it "seems" to
> >> > >me -
> >> > >that the flags of the U.N. - are all at equal height.
> >> >
> >> > EHHH! Wrong. The US flag is flown higher than the rest.
> >>
> >> Really? Please provide a picture.
> >
> > He's totally lost the plot now !
>
>
> Well, "I" wasn't sure of the flags at the U.N. - I should have posed it as a
> question. I said it "seemed" to be - they were all at the same height. That
> based on views I had seen - but never up close. So - are they or aren't
> they? Now I am asking.
They are all at the same height.
Graham
krw
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com says...
*DUMB* donkey! Are you trying to compete with Dimbulb?
> > > The guy cutting the flag down could have been arrested on *suspicion* of theft, but
> > > without clear proof the flag belonged to someone else, the case would fail.
> >
> > Wrong. It's unlikely anyone would prosecute without a police
> > report, but that's an administrative issue not a legal one.
>
> Proof of ownership of the item in question is required.
Nope. It makes for a better case if the owner comes forward, but
it's *not* necessary to convict.
--
Keith
krw
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com says...
You *are* a dumb donkey! Try reading again, then at least *try* to
think.
--
Keith
krw
sci.electronics.design, radio...@radiosrfun.com says...
--
Keith
radiosrfun
news:MPG.21cf9dbd4...@news.individual.net...
Thank you........
Eeyore
krw wrote:
> rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com says...
> >
> > Proof of ownership of the item in question is required.
>
> Nope. It makes for a better case if the owner comes forward, but
> it's *not* necessary to convict.
How can you possibly prove theft if the ownership of the item is unknown ?
Graham