LOL I was thinking the same thing, but I didn't want to be so blunt. Its not pointless so much as it is lacking direction.Miller wrote:
Wow, this is blatantly pointless and stupid....
Yeah I usually take 3 or 4 posts by me to give an intal thread direction sorry but hopefully it will turn out to be good.AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
LOL I was thinking the same thing, but I didn't want to be so blunt. Its not pointless so much as it is lacking direction.Miller wrote:
Wow, this is blatantly pointless and stupid....
* Poor grammar, evidently.cpt.fass1 wrote:
Ok Well in an other thread I posted that Car accidents cause more deaths a year then Terrorist so we should go to war with Japan, Germany, and Sweden. So I thought it would be fun to make a joke list of what effects our freedoms as American's or other countries as well.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-08-16 13:00:39)
care to elaborate a bit?SEREMAKER wrote:
A.c.l.u.
It's the quit countries that are doing all the planing. Volvo's are a safe car if your on the inside, think about it.Natte wrote:
What is wrong with Sweden? We produces Volvo and that is a quite safe car I think
If you even have to ask that, you have obviously NO idea what kind of cases and people the ACLU defends.R3v0LuT!oN wrote:
care to elaborate a bit?SEREMAKER wrote:
A.c.l.u.
ACLU tears away at our freedom, one side they fight for freedom of speech but they refuse to fight for the other freedoms and they are trying to rip apart our consitution ---- ex. they are fighting for the Westboro Baptist Church to protest at soldiers funerals and they also fight to have anything church related removed from any govt. property (hmm sounds little hypcritical to me) and the fight to abolish guns (protected by the 2nd Amendment), the fight to have the name God removed (they better start giving back their money then since it says "In God We Trust" )R3v0LuT!oN wrote:
care to elaborate a bit?SEREMAKER wrote:
A.c.l.u.
To add, hmm to name a few they have defended NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) I think you can infer what that group does....ummm Nazis, convicted murderes, Quadafi and the PLO in the 80's.....and the list goes on.SEREMAKER wrote:
ACLU tears away at our freedom, one side they fight for freedom of speech but they refuse to fight for the other freedoms and they are trying to rip apart our consitution ---- ex. they are fighting for the Westboro Baptist Church to protest at soldiers funerals and they also fight to have anything church related removed from any govt. property (hmm sounds little hypcritical to me) and the fight to abolish guns (protected by the 2nd Amendment), the fight to have the name God removed (they better start giving back their money then since it says "In God We Trust" )R3v0LuT!oN wrote:
care to elaborate a bit?SEREMAKER wrote:
A.c.l.u.
theres many more examples and just ask around - theres plenty of ppl that would be happy to see aclu disband
The Chicago Bears???{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
We should wage war against........Bears
chicago bears or polar bears{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
We should wage war against........Bears
Last edited by SEREMAKER (2006-08-16 13:43:01)
LOL, back at ya, and damn those polar bears and their addiction to Coca Cola!!!SEREMAKER wrote:
chicago bears or polar bears{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
We should wage war against........Bears
grrrrrr albert you beat me +1 to you my friend
Don't know, some people are either in the dark or on the dark side. No way to tell, unless he responds of course. But all mudslinging aside the ACLU does take on some cases that are of actual value to society, rare, but it does happen. Don't count on it. I still can't believe that the organization is still around. Here is a direct quote from the co founder of the ACLU Roger Baldwin:SEREMAKER wrote:
Hey AlbertWesker I wonder if we enlighted R3v0LuT!oN on the workings of the ACLU
What do you think now?I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself … I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.
No you can't ban someone from joining an organization based on their beliefs, hello the ACLU was founded by Communists, state your source.spastic bullet wrote:
I vote we go to war against molecules. You can't see them, but they're everywhere -- just waiting for the right moment. Never trust a molecule.
Regarding the ACLU, I don't know about the ins and outs of the specific cases mentioned above, but all those guys (the Westboro Baptists, NAMBLA, etc.), no matter how despicable, are like canaries in a mine shaft. If the gubmint can deny them civil liberties without due process, who is next?
Also, I think they specifically banned Communists from joining the ACLU in the 1940s, so there goes that theory.
I could be wrong, but is that really the ACLU position -- that NAMBLA should "have a right to a relationship with a young adolescent"? I'm skeptical, but open to any evidence you care to provide. The point I'm making is, when they break a law, by all means come down on them. Hard. But don't erode everybody's freedoms for the sake of a few twisted freaks. I apologize if I wasn't being sufficiently clear about that.AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
No you can't ban someone from joining an organization based on their beliefs, hello the ACLU was founded by Communists, state your source.spastic bullet wrote:
I vote we go to war against molecules. You can't see them, but they're everywhere -- just waiting for the right moment. Never trust a molecule.
Regarding the ACLU, I don't know about the ins and outs of the specific cases mentioned above, but all those guys (the Westboro Baptists, NAMBLA, etc.), no matter how despicable, are like canaries in a mine shaft. If the gubmint can deny them civil liberties without due process, who is next?
Also, I think they specifically banned Communists from joining the ACLU in the 1940s, so there goes that theory.
NAMBLA should not have a RIGHT to have a relationship with a young adolescent, I don't know what do YOU think? Thats not really a civil liberty, having sex with a boy is not really a right many Amercians enjoy or would fight to protect.