 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / January 2007WTF?
Today in this newsgroup there are most posts arguing about the date of Hawaiian statehood than there are about DRIVING. What's up wiff dat?  SignatureI hate speediots - especially Carl Troller. > Today in this newsgroup there are most posts arguing about the date of > Hawaiian statehood than there are about DRIVING. What's up wiff dat? I guess that's what happens when you have arrogant Yurrupeons who are ignorant of US history chiming in with their uninformed opinions. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> Today in this newsgroup there are most posts arguing about the date of >> Hawaiian statehood than there are about DRIVING. What's up wiff dat? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >nate How could that be? I thought we Americans had a lock on the arrogant thing? DPH Dave Head <rally2xs@att.net> said in rec.autos.driving: >>> Today in this newsgroup there are most posts arguing about the date of >>> Hawaiian statehood than there are about DRIVING. What's up wiff dat? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >How could that be? I thought we Americans had a lock on the arrogant thing? I guess we've lost our leadership position in every area. :) SignatureI hate speediots - especially Carl Troller. > Dave Head <rally2xs@att.net> said in rec.autos.driving: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > I guess we've lost our leadership position in every area. :) we've lost both arrogance AND ignorance? Oh noes! :) nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Nate Nagel said in rec.autos.driving: > > Dave Head <rally2xs@att.net> said in rec.autos.driving: > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > we've lost both arrogance AND ignorance? Oh noes! :) Well, as evidenced by our resident troll, we apparantly still lead in idiocy. ;) SignatureLoco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend defends a known *DRUNK DRIVER*: "Teddy went off a single lane bridge with no guard rail at night. The real killer was the idiot who built the bridge. Next question." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE June 20th, 2006 Ref: http://tinyurl.com/zlnyz Message ID: qcch92lislem5sqq92qgf7hf9mlm847sgh@4ax.com > Today in this newsgroup there are most posts arguing about the date of > Hawaiian statehood than there are about DRIVING. What's up wiff dat? huh? >Today in this newsgroup there are most posts arguing about the date of >Hawaiian statehood than there are about DRIVING. What's up wiff dat? 'Spose people got tired of calling each other and the general public idiots because of their driving, and now want to call each other idiots because of their (lack of) history knowledge? <G> Dave Head > On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 08:15:24 -0800, Scott en Aztlán > <scottenaztlan@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Dave Head In the balance scale of people thinking they are good drivers when they're not, vs. people thinking they know about history and current events when they don't, the scale has a gold ingot on the side of the ignorant, and a feather on the side of bad drivers. Steve > Today in this newsgroup there are most posts arguing about the date of > Hawaiian statehood than there are about DRIVING. What's up wiff dat? How about this... last night I got waved into a checkpoint. They set this one up stealth. At the last chance to turn... (one which led to the frontage road of the expressway I just exited) All I could see was a big construction arrow closing the left lane that I was in. The buick in the right lane blocked me from moving over as the driver behaved oddly. I thought a water main had broke or something.... But once past the point of no return it became apparent what it was... So I had to produce my papers. I made comments about how I thought we still had the constitution and such. Cop told me I should go to iraq. I made some comment about how he was making it like iraq here. He gave me back my papers and I then had to back up avoiding scraping my rims and go around the buick. The cops acting as if this was an act of kindness on there part to let me go without waiting longer. I had forgot that I should have been carrying my passport. I will carry it for the rest of weekend should I get caught in another papers check. I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers on demand, but so be it. I'll have to find some supporting writings by the founders to include. > I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local > paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers > on demand, but so be it. I'll have to find some supporting writings by > the founders to include. Don't know where you live, but where I live, if you won't produce proper identification upon demand, it is grounds for immediate arrest. Without knowing it, you may have been close to a trip to jail. Steve >>I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local >>paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Steve Hi Carl, I thought you lived in the Western US somewhere? If what you state is really the case perhaps it is time for you to read the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and start writing letters to your elected representatives. This shouldn't be the case anywhere in the US. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>>I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local >>>paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > nate Uh ................. pssssstttttttttttt Nate! Nate! If you plonk me, that means you can't read me or answer my posts .................. But while we are on the subject, and since you brought it up, where in the Constitution does it set laws about police departments identifying people? I can't find it. That doesn't mean it's not in there, but that I just can't find it. Yeah, write letters to your legislators and tell them that we should allow people to roam free within our midst without having to identify themselves. Ever hear of 911? I thought not. I live in Las Vegas, Nevada. If you don't have ID, you can be held until you can be positively identified, through such things as AFIS. If you behave strangely, they get you a room on the fourth floor of the local hospital. The floor with the metal grates on the windows and doors locked on both sides. If you plain refuse to provide ID, you are immediately arrested under the name of John Doe, and held until identity can be established. How do I know these things? My daughter and son-in-law are POs here, and I have worked as a coroner investigator. I have had a lot of involvement with police work that I don't need to go into here. Where do YOU get YOUR information? Steve > But while we are on the subject, and since you brought it up, where in the > Constitution does it set laws about police departments identifying people? We are not to be stopped and compeled to indentify ourselves to the government. > I can't find it. Because you have no clue regarding the founders intent. 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. AND Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. I was deprived of my liberty, held against my will and forced to have my papers inspected. 5 seconds or 5 years, it's not supposed to be. > That doesn't mean it's not in there, but that I just can't find it. Again, I suggest you learn bit more about what the intent was behind the founding documents. Here's a hint, they were ment to stop government from detaining people using the coveyances of the day and forcing them to indentify themselves. > Yeah, write letters to your legislators and tell them that we should allow > people to roam free within our midst without having to identify themselves. Land of the free... life, liberty, and persuit of happiness. Live free or die. Liberty or death. I don't think living under a police state where we need to produce papers at the government's whim like it was the USSR or Nazi Germany was part of the equation. Somehow this nation survived several wars without resorting to this. Wars in which governments landed people on this nation's soil to do harm. > Ever hear of 911? I thought not. Maybe the government could secure the southern border. Of course the prime suspect for 911 is various forces within the US government. That is of one looks at a significant percentage of all the available evidence and puts the time line together. As far as I am concerned, since the government is not securing the border, there is no real terror threat. The war on terror like the war on drugs is a war against the people of the USA by the government of the USA. > I live in Las Vegas, Nevada. If you don't have ID, you can be held until > you can be positively identified, through such things as AFIS. If you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > arrested under the name of John Doe, and held until identity can be > established. Sounds much like the soviet union. Comrade, you are mentally ill for questioning the government. > How do I know these things? My daughter and son-in-law are POs here, and I > have worked as a coroner investigator. I have had a lot of involvement with > police work that I don't need to go into here. The blind orders following soliders of the government. Just because the government tells you to do something doesn't make it right. > Where do YOU get YOUR information? Jefferson, Madison, Henry, Franklin, and so on. Read what they wrote. Powerful stuff. Very radical to those police state types that want control. It would not surprise me if it becomes banned sometime in the future. >Yeah, write letters to your legislators and tell them that we should allow >people to roam free within our midst without having to identify themselves. You just hate freedom. (and for once, I mean that absolutely seriously) >Ever hear of 911? I thought not. The emergency number? I've used it once or twice. What's it have to do with ID? SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >>Yeah, write letters to your legislators and tell them that we should allow >>people to roam free within our midst without having to identify [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The emergency number? I've used it once or twice. What's it have to > do with ID? Matthew, Matthew, Matthew. If we are going to have a conversation, you are going to have to pay more attention and keep up. Sticking to the conversation and points would surely help, too. You said that people shouldn't have to show IDs to the big bad police or government. I said that the events of the now generic event called 911 were caused by just such lax practices that allowed these terrorists to roam and travel freely in the US to conduct this operation. I said that I could live with being expected to provide information to certain people. I said that in some jurisdictions, a person can be arrested for refusing to identify themselves. I hope you got it that time, and are sobered up enough from last night to continue this discussion. If not, I shall be forced to filter you. Do try to keep up. Now go take a nap and come back when you've got it together. sheesh......... Steve > You said that people shouldn't have to show IDs to the big bad police or > government. > > I said that the events of the now generic event called 911 were caused by > just such lax practices that allowed these terrorists to roam and travel > freely in the US to conduct this operation. Let's see... let's examine your statement in light of the government's story. The government knew who these men were, the government knew they were on those planes. The government, hours after the event declared these men the perps. The government had their indentication information, had tracked them and what security did it provide? ZERO. It wasn't that there wasn't checking of IDs... there was. The government had the information and it didn't make one bit of difference. Same with these driving checkpoints. They are an intrusion into our lives for no benefit. > I said that I could live with being expected to provide information to > certain people. Good for you. However liberty is really an all or nothing thing IMO because as I see things happening, you give some up then you have to give more up, and more up, and eventually..... > I said that in some jurisdictions, a person can be arrested for refusing to > identify themselves. Which does not make it right. >> You said that people shouldn't have to show IDs to the big bad police or >> government. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Which does not make it right. Uh ........ psssssst ........ watch out for the invisible black helicopters .......... like the one right over you right now ............ and don't forget to wear that tinfoil liner in your ski cap.............. Steve > Uh ........ psssssst ........ watch out for the invisible black helicopters > .......... like the one right over you right now ............ and don't > forget to wear that tinfoil liner in your ski cap.............. In other words, you have no logical counter argument and resort to kookification/insult. >> Uh ........ psssssst ........ watch out for the invisible black >> helicopters [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > In other words, you have no logical counter argument and resort to > kookification/insult. WHOOSH! (the sound of an idea passing over a vacant air space) And in the future, try not to do such selective snipping that you cut out the comments that I am replying to. It makes you look foolish. Although you really don't need any help in that department, do you? Steve >>> Uh ........ psssssst ........ watch out for the invisible black >>> helicopters [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > It makes you look foolish. Although you really don't need any help in that > department, do you? You're just another good for nothing troll apparently who tries to get a rise out of people, and when that fails resorts to insults to get a rise out of them. Your kind is old and tiresome. Be gone. >>>> Uh ........ psssssst ........ watch out for the invisible black >>>> helicopters [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > rise out of people, and when that fails resorts to insults to get a rise > out of them. Your kind is old and tiresome. Be gone. Adios, MF. Now, care to talk about the original subject, or .......... let's say ....................... cars ............. or driving ................? I'm sure gonna miss you. Sob............. whimper ........... snork ................. giggle............... Steve > Adios, MF. Now, care to talk about the original subject, or .......... > let's say ....................... cars ............. or driving > ................? I was discussing driving. You wanted to change it to insults after you lost the debate. > I'm sure gonna miss you. So leave already. Be gone troll. > So leave already. Be gone troll. Wonderful. Does this mean you will stop engaging me, or will you continue to hang on my every post like it's the only thing happening in your life? Steve > Wonderful. Does this mean you will stop engaging me, or will you continue > to hang on my every post like it's the only thing happening in your life? You engaged me, troll. Now why don't you go crawl back under your bridge? >> Wonderful. Does this mean you will stop engaging me, or will you >> continue >> to hang on my every post like it's the only thing happening in your life? > > You engaged me, troll. Now why don't you go crawl back under your bridge? My point is proven. Now, answer this after telling me to be gone, and reiterate my point. Your move, Einstein. Steve > My point is proven. Now, answer this after telling me to be gone, and > reiterate my point. > Your move, Einstein. clue for you, fucktard: Telling you to 'be gone' != 'plonk'. However, now, it is: PLONK! >> My point is proven. Now, answer this after telling me to be gone, and >> reiterate my point. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > However, now, it is: PLONK! check and mate >>>>Uh ........ psssssst ........ watch out for the invisible black >>>>helicopters [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > rise out of people, and when that fails resorts to insults to get a rise > out of them. Your kind is old and tiresome. Be gone. Geez, is he still at it? And to see that he actually didn't know the definition of "ad hominem..." Irony, thy name is Steve B. (I still think he's an almost believable Carl sockpuppet, like Carl has started taking his medication or something.) nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Geez, is he still at it? And to see that he actually didn't know the > definition of "ad hominem..." Irony, thy name is Steve B. (I still think > he's an almost believable Carl sockpuppet, like Carl has started taking > his medication or something.) > > nate My request for a definition of ad hominem was, "What does this mean to you?" Sorry you missed that. Snotty twits that toss in obscure Latin phrases and illuminati buzzwords when they can't make a point in a conventional way bore me. I'll just stick to common English. If that's okay with you, that is ......... And if it is not, BIOYA. (That's not Latin) Steve > Snotty twits that toss in obscure Latin phrases and illuminati buzzwords > when they can't make a point in a conventional way bore me. You're the only one mentioning such things. Guess that makes you at twit by your own standard. >> Snotty twits that toss in obscure Latin phrases and illuminati buzzwords >> when they can't make a point in a conventional way bore me. > > You're the only one mentioning such things. Guess that makes you at twit > by your own standard. My condolences that you are not or not capable of following the conversation and thread. Work on it. You'll get there. Or not. Steve Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Brent P said in rec.autos.driving: > You're just another good for nothing troll apparently who tries to get a > rise out of people, and when that fails resorts to insults to get a rise > out of them. Your kind is old and tiresome. Be gone. That's why I gave Carl... errr..... "Steve B," the old kerrr-plonk not long after he appeared on the scene. Which ISTM, was right after Carl took his ball and went home yet again.... Signature-- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Benjamin Franklin Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Brent P said in rec.autos.driving: > Let's see... let's examine your statement in light of the government's > story. The government knew who these men were, the government knew they [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > there wasn't checking of IDs... there was. The government had the > information and it didn't make one bit of difference. I always found it interesting how by about 4PM that day that the pictures of the 19 hijackers were all over the news... > Same with these driving checkpoints. They are an intrusion into our lives > for no benefit. Depends on your perspective. For you and I there is no benefit and a definite cost to being papers checked like this. And how long will it be before we have to submit to being frisked/searched on demand. It may be starting at the staduims (see the Martial Law... thread), but don't be surprised if it extends to malls, public parks etc (of course all in the name of "safety.") > > I said that I could live with being expected to provide information to > > certain people. > > Good for you. However liberty is really an all or nothing thing IMO > because as I see things happening, you give some up then you have to give > more up, and more up, and eventually..... There will be alot of us leaving the USA (that is if the dictator in thief allows it) for such bastions of freedom as China and Castro's Cuba etc... > > I said that in some jurisdictions, a person can be arrested for refusing to > > identify themselves. > > Which does not make it right. Since when does the establishment in this once great nation care about what's "right?" Signature"I love this country... ...and the freedoms we used to have..." --George Carlin > Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Brent P said in > rec.autos.driving: >> Let's see... let's examine your statement in light of the government's >> story. The government knew who these men were, the government knew they [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> there wasn't checking of IDs... there was. The government had the >> information and it didn't make one bit of difference. > I always found it interesting how by about 4PM that day that the > pictures of the 19 hijackers were all over the news... It gets more interesting when examining this list of people. Some are still alive. Some were at US military and intelligence facilities apparently for training. Some were _caught_ and let go when customs people etc were ordered to let them through, apparently the men were US intelligence assets... it goes on and on. Then there are all the stand downs and missed opertunities to stop them. Yet, after all of that, I am supposed to believe that submitting myself to the whims and tracking of the state will keep me safe. Hardly. I does nothing but tell the government about my actions, my comings and goings. It doesn't keep me safe. The reason throughout history for such things is that government wants to be safe from the people, I see no reason to believe anything different here in the USA. These checkpoints don't do anything to keep us safer when driving. It's about control. Showing us who is in control. >> Same with these driving checkpoints. They are an intrusion into our lives >> for no benefit. > Depends on your perspective. For you and I there is no benefit and a > definite cost to being papers checked like this. And how long will it be > before we have to submit to being frisked/searched on demand. It may be > starting at the staduims (see the Martial Law... thread), but don't be > surprised if it extends to malls, public parks etc (of course all in the > name of "safety.") Of course. Government is paranoid and needs to be safe from us and does so by making us affraid of some boogie man or to protect us from ourselves. These checkpoints are supposedly to protect us from drunk drivers and to check if we are wearing our seatbelts. >> Good for you. However liberty is really an all or nothing thing IMO >> because as I see things happening, you give some up then you have to give >> more up, and more up, and eventually..... > There will be alot of us leaving the USA (that is if the dictator in > thief allows it) for such bastions of freedom as China and Castro's Cuba > etc... What is really begining to irk me is how the news media talks of democracy. That we should all have the benefits of democracy. As if a controlled choice of who to vote for is somehow meaningful. I want my rights protected, I want to live free, be free to travel, I want liberty. None of which are automatic in a democracy. A democracy can be just as great a tyranny as dictatorship. The devil is in the details. A benevolent dicatorship, where everyone's rights are protected and honored by the dicator can work very well, and democracy can set up a buracracy that imprisons people for having the 'wrong' opinions and be a hellish nation in which to live. >> > I said that in some jurisdictions, a person can be arrested for refusing to >> > identify themselves. >> Which does not make it right. > Since when does the establishment in this once great nation care about > what's "right?" And that is the point. > Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Brent P said in > rec.autos.driving: [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > Since when does the establishment in this once great nation care about > what's "right?" well,that's what happens when you don't elect people who will FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION as written.("liberals"/socialists,Democrats) The ones who want to "intepret" the Constitution based on the popular opinion of the day,instead of amending the Constitution as proper. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Jim Yanik said in rec.autos.driving: > well,that's what happens when you don't elect people who will FOLLOW THE > CONSTITUTION as written.("liberals"/socialists,Democrats) "liberal,"/socialist/Democrat; "neo-con,"/fascist/Republican. (IME, there are no true conservatived in the republican party any more, just neo-con crooks who disguise themselves as conservatives) What's the difference? > The ones who want to "intepret" the Constitution based on the popular > opinion of the day,instead of amending the Constitution as proper. Both want to twist the Constitution to suit their whims and in my view are equally vile and evil. SignatureSincerely, The New World Order. > Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Jim Yanik said > in rec.autos.driving: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Both want to twist the Constitution to suit their whims and in my view > are equally vile and evil. well,more Republican representatives support an individual RKBA than democRATs(excluding RINOs). The 'Rats just make noises that they support it,but VOTE the opposite.It's the socialists/'Rats that talk about a "Living Constitution",interpreted depending on the current opinion,not what's written. the 'Rats don't seem to want to defend the country,either;surrender monkeys,appeasers. IMO,Repubs are the -lesser- of two evils,not equal evils. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > The 'Rats just make noises that they support it,but VOTE the opposite.It's > the socialists/'Rats that talk about a "Living Constitution",interpreted > depending on the current opinion,not what's written. Democrat: 'it's a living document' Republican: 'it's just a goddamn piece of paper' As someone who believes first in what the Bill of Rights Stands for and second for the constitution created by men with better sight into how government will always seek complete and total power than any other group I know of I find both modern parties fundamentally the same and equally repulsive. >Matthew, Matthew, Matthew. snip of a whole bunch of idiocy or trolling >Steve Steve steve stevie boy, have you ever heard the expression "go f.ck yourself?" >>Matthew, Matthew, Matthew. > snip of a whole bunch of idiocy or trolling >>Steve > > Steve steve stevie boy, have you ever heard the expression "go f.ck > yourself?" >>Matthew, Matthew, Matthew. > snip of a whole bunch of idiocy or trolling >>Steve > > Steve steve stevie boy, have you ever heard the expression "go f.ck > yourself?" No, I think that is a popular activity among you young studs. Does this mean you won't be hanging on my every word from now on? <g> Steve >>>Yeah, write letters to your legislators and tell them that we should allow >>>people to roam free within our midst without having to identify [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> The emergency number? I've used it once or twice. What's it have to >> do with ID? >I said that the events of the now generic event called 911 were caused by >just such lax practices that allowed these terrorists to roam and travel >freely in the US to conduct this operation. Oh, you mean "9/11", a.k.a the "anti-freedom talisman". Sorry, just invoking it that way doesn't work with thinking people. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >> Hi Carl, >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >> nate snip of some idiocy >But while we are on the subject, and since you brought it up, where in the >Constitution does it set laws about police departments identifying people? > >I can't find it. > >That doesn't mean it's not in there, but that I just can't find it. No, it means you can't read. Common problem among cops. >Yeah, write letters to your legislators and tell them that we should allow >people to roam free within our midst without having to identify themselves. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >have worked as a coroner investigator. I have had a lot of involvement with >police work that I don't need to go into here. Now we know. Supporter of illegal activity everywhere as long as it is by the cops. > I live in Las Vegas, Nevada. If you don't have ID, you can be held until > you can be positively identified, through such things as AFIS. Hiibel has not extended the issue that far; Las Vegas is pushing it until someone pushes back. When they do, the city will lose. > How do I know these things? My daughter and son-in-law are POs here, and I > have worked as a coroner investigator. I have had a lot of involvement with > police work that I don't need to go into here. Apparently, that doesn't include actually reading Supreme Court opinions. > Where do YOU get YOUR information? You want to take a guess? It is very clear from the opinion that identifying oneself by name (and without producing any papers at all) will be sufficient: "the Nevada Supreme Court has interpreted the instant statute to require only that a suspect disclose his name. It apparently does not require him to produce a driver's license or any other document. If he chooses either to state his name or communicate it to the officer by other means, the statute is satisfied and no violation occurs" - HIIBEL V. SIXTH JUDICIAL DIST. COURT OF NEV.,HUMBOLDT CTY. (03-5554) 542 U.S. 177 Hiibel refused to identify himself in any way. Not that I agree with this decision. It is another step toward the Nazification of America with constant 'papers checks' everywhere. But Nazi cops and their ilk tend to like that. Don't you, Steve? -- C.R. Krieger Not afraid to post under my real name - like Steve is. >> I live in Las Vegas, Nevada. If you don't have ID, you can be held until >> you can be positively identified, through such things as AFIS. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > C.R. Krieger > Not afraid to post under my real name - like Steve is. I stand corrected, and thank you. Steve in response to Steve B wrote: > Hiibel refused to identify himself in any way. Not that I agree with > this decision. It is another step toward the Nazification of America > with constant 'papers checks' everywhere. But Nazi cops and their ilk > tend to like that. Don't you, Steve? I wonder if Steve voted for shrub. Shrub is the grandson of a man, Prescott Bush, who aided in the financing of the Nazi party. I doubt this sort of financing just doesn't happen by accident, as we are supposed to believe it does. Then there was the integration of nazis into the US government intelligence agencies and the industrial military complex after the end of WW2. The nazification of america should come at no surprise. For those interested in Prescott Bush: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html > I wonder if Steve voted for shrub. If you are asking if I voted for Bush, yes, I did. I thought it was a wiser choice than to vote for a man who was a slumlord, and who was so out of touch with reality he claimed he invented the Internet. Kinda like the lesser of two evils. But I do like that AlGore is bringing some attention to global warming, although he is riding the coattails of intellectuals, and not having a genuinely original thought in the whole process. Have a nice day. Steve > > I wonder if Steve voted for shrub. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and who was so out of touch with reality he claimed he invented the > Internet. He never made such a claim of course. You were misled. Deliberately misled in fact. Think about that next time you vote for some liars. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp Graham Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers) - 04 Jan 2007 01:43 GMT Someone wrote: >He never made such a claim of course. You were misled. Deliberately misled in >fact. Think about that next time you vote for some liars. My impression is that regardless of the political affiliation of the candidate you vote for, the candidate is a liar. Signaturegpstard (gpsman@driversmail.com) demonstrates his inability to comprehend the simple differences of the definitions of the monosyllabic words "time" and "chance:" (Message-ID: <1167151218.287827.24230@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>) Why don't you argue that the faster one drives the less time spent driving and available to be involved in an accident? "Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's homosexuallity: the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en "Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's ability to operate a vehicle: I must be doing something right to go 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash. : http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/a376114ee8a61824?hl=en Joshua Calvert <joshua_l_calvert@hotmail.com> demonstrates his lack of understanding of the terms "sarcasm", "irony", and "hypocrisy": Poor rightard, forced to whine about an 40 year old event. Message-ID: <Xns970A68202F1C5joshualcalverthotmai@68.6.19.6> >>>I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local >>>paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Bill of Rights, and start writing letters to your elected >representatives. This shouldn't be the case anywhere in the US. It shouldn't, but it is. You missed a decision of the Robed 9. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >>>>I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local >>>>paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > It shouldn't, but it is. You missed a decision of the Robed 9. I didn't miss anything, I'm just saying that whenever one encounters a papers check IRL it is worth protesting. Believe me I will be if/when they come here (fairly likely, as the DC area is probably the most paranoid in the country) nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com You missed a decision of the Robed 9. Translation ............ ? > You missed a decision of the Robed 9. > > Translation ............ ? the US Supreme Court. Are you totally clueless? SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >> I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local >> paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > identification upon demand, it is grounds for immediate arrest. Without > knowing it, you may have been close to a trip to jail. I produced my papers. I however used one of the few remaining amendments, number one in the process. >> I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or local >> paper. I'll look like the crazy person that doesn't like producing papers [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >identification upon demand, it is grounds for immediate arrest. Without >knowing it, you may have been close to a trip to jail. Move to the US. Although they still may ask for them, it is against our constitution to jail you for refusing. >>> I think I'll be sending letters to that village's government and/or >>> local [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Move to the US. Although they still may ask for them, it is against > our constitution to jail you for refusing. I guess the state of Nevada doesn't observe the Constitution, then. You can be arrested here for vagrancy for refusing to provide identification. Steve |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.