Ft. Hood victims
Wayne
Hearts? They very clearly qualify. Or will this be omitted for political
correctness reasons?
Berry Oakley
> So.....when are the Ft. Hood victims going to be awarded their Purple
> Hearts?
So... why were you born retarded?
Wayne
"Berry Oakley" <AllmanB...@bass.gov> wrote in message
news:4b004a84$0$31285$607e...@cv.net...
And why do you not think this was a terrorist act?
Lookout
wrote:
One terrorist acting alone is not a terrorist act.
Pretty much what I said from the beginning.
Jim Yanik
news:hdpg7d$4am$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
> So.....when are the Ft. Hood victims going to be awarded their Purple
> Hearts? They very clearly qualify. Or will this be omitted for
> political correctness reasons?
>
>
don't you have to be shot IN COMBAT?(at least in a combat zone?)
although I've heard one of Traitor John Kerry's PHs was when he fragged
himself.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
Lookout
wrote:
You heard wrong. Stop listening to Faux Commentary network
tankfixer
mygarb...@verizon.net says...
>
> So.....when are the Ft. Hood victims going to be awarded their Purple
> Hearts? They very clearly qualify. Or will this be omitted for political
> correctness reasons?
Interesting, hadn't thought of that angle...
Lookout
wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_Heart#Criteria
Specific examples of services which warrant the Purple Heart include
any action against an enemy of the United States; any action with an
opposing armed force of a foreign country in which the Armed Forces of
the United States are or have been engaged; while serving with
friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an
opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent
party; as a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed
forces; or as the result of an act of any hostile foreign force. After
28 March 1973, as a result of an international terrorist attack
against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the United
States, recognized as such an attack by the Secretary of the Army, or
jointly by the Secretaries of the separate armed services concerned if
persons from more than one service are wounded in the attack. After 28
March 1973, as a result of military operations while serving outside
the territory of the United States as part of a peacekeeping force.
I don't think it fits.
tankfixer
Lookout
wrote:
Does one make acting alone make it a terrorist act? I don't think so.
Gray Ghost
news:gpi2g55ar2ue4mo9q...@4ax.com:
I wasn't aware that acting alone or in concert with others was part of the
defintion. Let's check.
Definitions of terrorism on the Web:
* the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against
civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ...
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
* State terrorism refers to acts of terrorism conducted by governments.
Like the definition of terrorism and that of state-sponsored terrorism, the
definition of state terrorism remains controversial and without international
consensus.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_(state)
* Terrorism is a policy or ideology of violence Terrorism in asymmetrical
conflict: ideological and structural aspects, By Ekaterina Stepanova,
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Oxford University Press US,
2008 ISBN 0199533555, 9780199533558 186 pages, page 28, "the Russian ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
# terror - panic: an overwhelming feeling of fear and anxiety
# terror - a person who inspires fear or dread; "he was the terror of the
neighborhood"
# terror - a very troublesome child
# terror - the use of extreme fear in order to coerce people (especially for
political reasons); "he used terror to make them confess"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
# terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually
organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a
cover for ...
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
****
usually but not always
****
ter?ror?ism
/?t?r??r?z?m/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
Use terrorism in a Sentence
See web results for terrorism
See images of terrorism
�noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for
political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
***
And even if it were to be extended to acting in concert, it would appear tbat
Islamic Jihad is in fact an ideology that any Muslim is free to join.
Therefore making it a group thing. As in if religious leaders weren't
promting it thatn maybe it wouldn't happen.
So how does it feel, once again, to be the stupidest man (boy) in the room,
lieing coward?
--
�Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel
of envy, its inherent value is the equal sharing of misery.� Winston
Churchill
tankfixer
You have proof he was acting alone ?
If so then you have a duty to share that proof with the Army.
Wayne
"Lookout" <mrLo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:94d1g5t6hg1cea0sp...@4ax.com...
Well, the military that was injured/killed at the Pentagon on 9/11 were all
awarded Purple Hearts. And the Ft. Hood shooter jumped up on the table and
shouted "allahu akbar" before shooting. That makes him a terrorist in my
book.
Bama Brian
Ain't a-gonna happen; not with the Muslin-in-charge in the White House.
--
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana
Scout
Maybe, maybe not, but it certainly doesn't make him an international
terrorist which is a requirement for this medal.
Lookout
You proved my point. As far as we know he was acting alone.
Thanks for the help.
Lookout
wrote:
Is there any proof he wasn't?
>If so then you have a duty to share that proof with the Army.
I'm waiting. You're already calling it a terrorist act.
Dumbass
Lookout
wrote:
The 911 attack was a coordinated effort.
The Ft Hood act was, as far as we know now a man acting alone. Huge
difference.
"That makes him a terrorist in my book"
You're book means nothing.
Wayne
"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:aBfMm.35010$de6....@newsfe21.iad...
congressman or senator (preferrably from Texas, of course) introducing
legislation to that effect for the Ft. Hood event. I'd like to see that
because it would make C-Span VERY interesting during the
debates/voting/veto. :)
Gray Ghost
news:ca53g5hsg8b97t0ji...@4ax.com:
As I have already posted a person acting alone can be a terrorist. He
espoused islamic principles, he shouted Allah Akbahr or whatever stupid thing
they say when they go into terror mode.
This is why your kind CANNOT be trusted with the security of this country.
Ever. Or anything else for that matter.
Gray Ghost
news:5753g55kce6apcut6...@4ax.com:
Again, your comprehension skills are far below average. Show us where
anything I posted says that a person acting alone is not a terrorist.
Lookout
wrote:
After the fact? Nah..won't happen.
>
Lookout
That's YOUR opinion. You're wrong
> He
>espoused islamic principles, he shouted Allah Akbahr or whatever stupid thing
>they say when they go into terror mode.
>
>This is why your kind CANNOT be trusted with the security of this country.
>Ever. Or anything else for that matter.
Who is my kind?
The conservative kind were trusted for 8 years and the latest
casualties were lost at Ft Hood.
Lookout
(Gray Ghost) wrote:
YOU have to prove that someone acting alone IS a terrorist act. Until
that's proven UNDER FEDERAL LAW he isn't a terrorist.
It's YOUR reading comprehension that's lacking.
Scout
Will legislation somehow alter the reality of what occured?
I mean, hell, if all we need is a piece of legislation, let's introduce a
law to repeal the speed of light.
tankfixer
me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
His correspondence with foreign agents is an interesting fact..
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
Please explain how a persons opinion can be wrong ?
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
His correspondence with foreign agents...
>
> >If so then you have a duty to share that proof with the Army.
>
> I'm waiting. You're already calling it a terrorist act.
Terrorist or traitor..
He is one or the other, possibly both.
> Dumbass
Don't be so hard on yourself..
You can learn, if you work hard..
Gray Ghost
news:MPG.256bcf4...@news.bytemine.net:
If it's Lookout's position, it's wrong by definition.
Lookout
wrote:
True. But the will have to prove a two way correspondence that
specifically deals with a scenario like this IMHO. Unless they find
that I doubt the terrorist act will stick in court.
Hey..I'm just being fair here.
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
I guess once you prove he isn't a terrorist that leave only the fact he
is a traitor...
The boy only has frying pan or fire to choose from..
Lookout
wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitor#United_Kingdom
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War
against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and
Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the
Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in
open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason,
but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or
Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
However, Congress has, at times, passed statutes creating related
offenses which undermine the government or the national security, such
as sedition in the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts, or espionage and
sedition in the 1917 Espionage Act, which do not require the testimony
of two witnesses and have a much broader definition than Article Three
treason. For example, some well-known spies have been convicted of
espionage rather than treason.
The Constitution does not itself create the offense; it only restricts
the definition (the first paragraph), permits Congress to create the
offense, and restricts any punishment for treason to only the
convicted (the second paragraph). The crime is prohibited by
legislation passed by Congress. Therefore the United States Code at 18
U.S.C. � 2381 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States,
levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid
and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of
treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than
five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and
shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States." The
requirement of testimony of two witnesses was inherited from the
British Treason Act 1695 (Since 1945, however, this has been abolished
in British law and treason cases are now subject to the same rules of
evidence and procedure as a murder trial, but the US requirement still
stands barring an amendment).
In the history of the United States there have been fewer than 40
federal prosecutions for treason and even fewer convictions. Several
men were convicted of treason in connection with the 1794 Whiskey
Rebellion but were pardoned by President George Washington. One of
American history's most notorious traitors, in which his name is
considered synonymous with the definition of traitor, is Benedict
Arnold. The most famous treason trial, that of Aaron Burr in 1807 (See
Burr conspiracy), resulted in acquittal. Politically motivated
attempts to convict opponents of the Jeffersonian Embargo Acts and the
Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 all failed. Most states have provisions in
their constitutions or statutes similar to those in the U.S.
Constitution. There have been only two successful prosecutions for
treason on the state level, that of Thomas Dorr in Rhode Island and
that of John Brown in Virginia.
After the American Civil War, no person involved with the Confederate
States of America was tried for treason, though a number of leading
Confederates (including Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee) were
indicted. Those who had been indicted received a blanket amnesty
issued by President Andrew Johnson as he left office in 1869. The Cold
War saw frequent associations between treason and support for (or
insufficient hostility toward) Communist-backed causes. The most
memorable of these came from Senator Joseph McCarthy, who
characterized the Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman
administrations as "twenty years of treason." McCarthy also
investigated various government agencies for Soviet spy rings;
however, he acted as a political fact-finder rather than criminal
prosecutor. The Cold War period saw few prosecutions for treason.
On October 11, 2006, a federal grand jury issued the first indictment
for treason against the United States since 1952, charging Adam Yahiye
Gadahn for videos in which he spoke supportively of al-Qaeda.[6]
>
>The boy only has frying pan or fire to choose from..
I really don't think they will go there. Pre mediated murder is about
as far as they can go.
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...> > [quoted text muted]
> >> Hey..I'm just being fair here.
> >
> >I guess once you prove he isn't a terrorist that leave only the fact he
> >is a traitor...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitor#United_Kingdom
>
> Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War
> against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and
> Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the
> Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in
> open Court.
I believe this clause has been met on at least two counts.
And there are plenty more than two witnesses...
Lookout
wrote:
I believe you're wrong. We'll see.
Look at the past history of trying treason and then I think you'll
agree.
tankfixer
>
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:43:10 -0800, tankfixer <paul.c...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <ihl5g55j9s7nt26m2...@4ax.com>,
> >mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
> >> On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:41:37 -0800, tankfixer <paul.c...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > [quoted text muted]
> >> >> Hey..I'm just being fair here.
> >> >
> >> >I guess once you prove he isn't a terrorist that leave only the fact he
> >> >is a traitor...
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitor#United_Kingdom
> >>
> >> Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War
> >> against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and
> >> Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the
> >> Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in
> >> open Court.
> >
> >I believe this clause has been met on at least two counts.
> >And there are plenty more than two witnesses...
> >
> I believe you're wrong. We'll see.
> Look at the past history of trying treason and then I think you'll
> agree.
Then again they did try one of the persons who helped John Wilkes Booth
by a military tribunal and had her hung...
Lookout
wrote:
Ya..and that was a president. Huge difference here.
And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
(religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
RD (The Sandman)
news:hdrv10$8oj$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
But not to our politically correct administration.
--
Sleep well tonight,
RD (The Sandman)
Let's see if I have this healthcare thingy right. Congress is to pass
a plan written by a committee whose head has said he doesn't understand
it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who
hasn't read it, with funding administered by a Treasury chief who didn't
pay his taxes because he didn't understand TurboTax, overseen by an obese
Surgeon General and financed by a country that's nearly broke.
What could possibly go wrong?
Berry Oakley
Your hero, Jimmy Swaggert, IS a liberal!
Lookout
Ya..because the last administration didn't give a damn about being
correct about anything.
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
Why ?
Are we not equal ?
> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
Lookout
wrote:
Not at all.
>
>
>> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
>> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
>
>How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
>Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
>
I equate ALL religions with mental illness you idiot. Stop drinking
for a week or so and catch up.
tankfixer
Somehow that answer doesn't suprise me from you.
> >
> >
> >> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
> >> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
> >
> >How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
> >Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
> >
> I equate ALL religions with mental illness you idiot. Stop drinking
> for a week or so and catch up.
So you engage in hate speech often...
Lookout
wrote:
Some tries to ASSINATE the president the get the death penalty or
life.
Someone tries to KILL you and they could get 5 years. So there's no
difference? You really are this stupid, aren't you?
>> >> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
>> >> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
>> >
>> >How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
>> >Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
>> >
>> I equate ALL religions with mental illness you idiot. Stop drinking
>> for a week or so and catch up.
>
>So you engage in hate speech often...
Not at all. You're lying again.
RD (The Sandman)
RD (The Sandman)
news:3j49g55lvs3tee8dj...@4ax.com:
I didn't support them either so you are barking at an empty tree.
Lookout
I'm not a religious fundamentalist.
You fucked up again.
tankfixer
The individual I meantioned didn't try to assasinate anyone. Was merely
involved helping the killer escape.
> Someone tries to KILL you and they could get 5 years. So there's no
> difference? You really are this stupid, aren't you?
Actually to do so would qualify for one of your beloved hate crimes..
>
> >> >> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
> >> >> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
> >> >
> >> >How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
> >> >Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
> >> >
> >> I equate ALL religions with mental illness you idiot. Stop drinking
> >> for a week or so and catch up.
> >
> >So you engage in hate speech often...
>
> Not at all. You're lying again.
I'm not lying when you engage in hate speech in nearly every post you
make...
RD (The Sandman)
news:63dbg55u36hbpec1e...@4ax.com:
However, you do have an obvious mental problem.
> You fucked up again.
Nope.
Lookout
wrote:
The PRESIDENT. That makes it different
>
>> Someone tries to KILL you and they could get 5 years. So there's no
>> difference? You really are this stupid, aren't you?
>
>Actually to do so would qualify for one of your beloved hate crimes..
Nope. Wrong again
>> >> >> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
>> >> >> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
>> >> >
>> >> >How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
>> >> >Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
>> >> >
>> >> I equate ALL religions with mental illness you idiot. Stop drinking
>> >> for a week or so and catch up.
>> >
>> >So you engage in hate speech often...
>>
>> Not at all. You're lying again.
>
>I'm not lying when you engage in hate speech in nearly every post you
>make...
Sure you are.
Lookout
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
I was checked out just over a year ago and I'm perfectly normal abet
I do have above average intelligence and IQ. When were you last
checked?
>
>> You fucked up again.
>
>Nope.
Sure you did.
RD (The Sandman)
news:n0sdg5lad6r4328ja...@4ax.com:
Possibly. 101 is above average.
> When were you last checked?
I haven't had a need to be since 1953. Why were you checked? Was it
court ordered? ;)
Lookout
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
AHAHAH Conservatives always imply the worst due to poor self image.
Regular follow-up appt after transplant surgery. The do a before and
after.
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
Not really.
> >
> >> Someone tries to KILL you and they could get 5 years. So there's no
> >> difference? You really are this stupid, aren't you?
> >
> >Actually to do so would qualify for one of your beloved hate crimes..
>
> Nope. Wrong again
You hate is obvious.
Good luck trying to convince a jury otherwise.
>
> >> >> >> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
> >> >> >> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
> >> >> >Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
> >> >> >
> >> >> I equate ALL religions with mental illness you idiot. Stop drinking
> >> >> for a week or so and catch up.
> >> >
> >> >So you engage in hate speech often...
> >>
> >> Not at all. You're lying again.
> >
> >I'm not lying when you engage in hate speech in nearly every post you
> >make...
>
> Sure you are.
Hows that hope and change working out for you
tankfixer
RD (The Sandman)
news:hl5eg5dltcvg4nr1q...@4ax.com:
What was transplanted? Your brain?
Lookout
wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:24:11 -0600, Lookout <mrLo...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>Brain Transplant?
Nah..you're just being stupid and whiney. Thanks for letting me know I
won again.
So..when was the last time you were checked? We KNOW I don't have any
mental problems...can you say the same? See how I used your own logic
against you? See how easy it is to make a fool of you when you help?
Dumbass
Lookout
wrote:
Of course it does. Stop being stupid
>> >
>> >> Someone tries to KILL you and they could get 5 years. So there's no
>> >> difference? You really are this stupid, aren't you?
>> >
>> >Actually to do so would qualify for one of your beloved hate crimes..
>>
>> Nope. Wrong again
>
>You hate is obvious.
Who do I hate?
>Good luck trying to convince a jury otherwise.
What jury?
>>
>> >> >> >> And if we execute and American citizen with an obvious mental problem
>> >> >> >> (religious fundamentalism) then who's next? Jimmy Swaggert?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >How dare you equate Islam with mental illness !
>> >> >> >Such hate speech is just not allowed under Dear Leader don't ya know//
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> I equate ALL religions with mental illness you idiot. Stop drinking
>> >> >> for a week or so and catch up.
>> >> >
>> >> >So you engage in hate speech often...
>> >>
>> >> Not at all. You're lying again.
>> >
>> >I'm not lying when you engage in hate speech in nearly every post you
>> >make...
>>
>> Sure you are.
>
>Hows that hope and change working out for you
>
No idea. I didn't vote for Obama. Now if you are going to say I did
then please back that up with facts. Show just ONCE where I said I was
going to vote for him. Search all of Usenet..go a head. I made it
clear I thought Hillary would win the primaries. When Obama won I was
as surprised as the rest of you. In the general election I voted for a
3rd (and that's a stretch) party candidate. It doesn't matter how I
vote in Alabama. This is the dumbest state in the union and they will
always vote for the conservative. My vote is wasted here.
Lookout
wrote:
That's not a transplant dumbass. Break the word down and you're know
that.
Lookout
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
Stupid people aren't very inventive. You all seem to working off the
same 4 brain cells.
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
If you didn't vote for Obama and since it's obvious you find McCain with
disdain that leaves the other, even more leftist candidates...
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
They needed brains for a transplant and since you wen't using your's
they just took a bit...
Klaus Schadenfreude
>> >Hows that hope and change working out for you
>> >
>> No idea. I didn't vote for Obama. Now if you are going to say I did
>> then please back that up with facts. Show just ONCE where I said I was
>> going to vote for him. Search all of Usenet..go a head. I made it
>> clear I thought Hillary would win the primaries. When Obama won I was
>> as surprised as the rest of you. In the general election I voted for a
>> 3rd (and that's a stretch) party candidate. It doesn't matter how I
>> vote in Alabama. This is the dumbest state in the union and they will
>> always vote for the conservative. My vote is wasted here.
>
>If you didn't vote for Obama and since it's obvious you find McCain with
>disdain that leaves the other, even more leftist candidates...
Cynthia McKinney.
tankfixer
klausscha...@yahoo.com says...
But is she "progressive" enough for our friend ?
Klaus Schadenfreude
She's probably a little too far to the right for Lookout, but his only
other choice is Gloria La Riva. He couldn't vote for her because his
"Che" shirt got stolen at the laundromat.
RD (The Sandman)
news:1tggg5te28731ci3r...@4ax.com:
I asked you a simply question. You stated that you had a IQ test
following a transplant. I asked you what got transplanted. You indicated
that for this transplant, they do a before and an after of your IQ. I
was curious as to what that transplant was that required that.
Can you answer the question? Will you answer the question?
RD (The Sandman)
news:dcfgg5tvih0oekbt3...@4ax.com:
No, we don't. For example, this is the internet....you can make any
claim you wish. Secondly, there is not test that will detect all mental
problems unless you are manifesting one at the time of the test. No
mental test will tell the future.
...can you say the same? See how I used your own logic
> against you? See how easy it is to make a fool of you when you help?
I can see how easy it is for you to think so.
RD (The Sandman)
news:7lggg5lc88g5085jd...@4ax.com:
Ahhhh, Alabama. Since this is a gun group, let me bring it more toward
the subject of the newsgroup. You rant in here from time to time about
guns and how they kill and maim. You may appreciate this newsclip.
Fairfield - Police are investigating after a woman lost control of her
car and struck 10 children and an adult outside a middle school in
Alabama.
Witnesses told the Birmingham News that the woman in her 60s was trying
to avoid children playing in the street when the crash occurred Friday
afternoon.
Fairfiled Police Chief Patrick Mardis told the newspaper that one child
was in serious condition at Children's Hospital in Birmingham with
internal injuries and the adult victim was listed in critical condition
at UAB Hospital in Birmingham. The other victims suffered bruises and
broken bones.
Now, let's hear your rant about "assault automobiles" and how they should
be banned. Do it for the children. ;)
RD (The Sandman)
Klaus Schadenfreude
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
>Ahhhh, Alabama. Since this is a gun group, let me bring it more toward
>the subject of the newsgroup. You rant in here from time to time about
>guns and how they kill and maim. You may appreciate this newsclip.
>
>Fairfield - Police are investigating after a woman lost control of her
>car and struck 10 children and an adult outside a middle school in
>Alabama.
>
>Witnesses told the Birmingham News that the woman in her 60s was trying
>to avoid children playing in the street when the crash occurred Friday
>afternoon.
>
>Fairfiled Police Chief Patrick Mardis told the newspaper that one child
>was in serious condition at Children's Hospital in Birmingham with
>internal injuries and the adult victim was listed in critical condition
>at UAB Hospital in Birmingham. The other victims suffered bruises and
>broken bones.
>
>Now, let's hear your rant about "assault automobiles" and how they should
>be banned. Do it for the children. ;)
<lookout>
It's OK. "Cars aren't designed to kill."
</lookout>
Berry Oakley
Gray Ghost
news:Xns9CCB6C04D...@216.196.97.130:
>> Nah..you're just being stupid and whiney. Thanks for letting me know I
>> won again.
>> So..when was the last time you were checked? We KNOW I don't have any
>> mental problems
>
> No, we don't. For example, this is the internet....you can make any
> claim you wish. Secondly, there is not test that will detect all mental
> problems unless you are manifesting one at the time of the test. No
> mental test will tell the future.
>
Everybody has problems of one sort or another. Failure to acknowledge your
own problems is a sure sign of insanity, don't you think RD?
--
�Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel
of envy, its inherent value is the equal sharing of misery.� Winston
Churchill
Lookout
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
So you sat on your ass and didn't vote at all..
Typical..
Lookout
wrote:
Wrong again. As I said in another thread I voted for a 3rd party
candidate...my way of encouraging more 3rd party candidates.
tankfixer
RD (The Sandman)
news:Xns9CCB9DE4E2EFCWe...@216.196.97.142:
> "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:Xns9CCB6C04D...@216.196.97.130:
>
>>> Nah..you're just being stupid and whiney. Thanks for letting me know
>>> I won again.
>>> So..when was the last time you were checked? We KNOW I don't have
>>> any mental problems
>>
>> No, we don't. For example, this is the internet....you can make any
>> claim you wish. Secondly, there is not test that will detect all
>> mental problems unless you are manifesting one at the time of the
>> test. No mental test will tell the future.
>>
>
> Everybody has problems of one sort or another. Failure to acknowledge
> your own problems is a sure sign of insanity, don't you think RD?
>
I'd be crazy not to. ;)
Lookout
tankfixer
Lookout
wrote:
He will NOT be charged under any terrorism law UNLESS he is still
around when the republicans have the White House.
End of discussion.
tankfixer
Ashamed you voted for Ron Paul ?
> End of discussion.
Always knew you leftists don't like dissent...