The protests against the beginning of the war took place earlier today. I along with 4 other friends attended the one in front of the federal building in Westwood, Ca.

Before we showed up at the scheduled time (5 PM) about 30 protestors we're dragged from a sit-in they did in the intersection near the protest site. I heard different accounts that it was peaceful to a couple of people got minorly beaten by arresting officers. They faced fines later that evening.

It was pretty small scale compared to past ones I've been to but had a big handful of people attending. My friends and I were dressed pretty much in black bloc associated clothing, as I always protest in. We had a 10 foot banner manned by two people and me on the snare drum to rally the masses.

Throughout the time, we noticed a group of about 10-12 riot geared officers monitoring our group specifically. This was certain when we crossed the street and they followed and lined up behind us all as if we were attempting to do something illegal. We kept an eye on them for the most part with an escape route in the case that they try to rush us.

When we decided to leave, our path out is about a quarter mile of sidewalk not inhabited by any protestors. We walked to the end of the rally and checked to see if the police officers were following us. They stayed in their position so we figured that they just want us out of there.

About 1/4 of the ways into the walk, we noticed the group assigned to us was following us out. We proceeding to walk faster wondering if we should make a move. Since we've done nothing wrong that day, we under-estimated their intent.

When we got to the entrance to the 405 freeway, they flashed their light at us and yelled "Hey there, stop!"

About 4 squad cars swoop up and take up two lanes so there is a total of about 25 riot gear cops shouting at us. They we yelling for us to get against the chain link fence. We were ordered to drop all of our outer possessions (i.e. backpacks, my snare drum, the drum sticks, our banned, etc.). They slammed us all against the fence and hand cuffed us all right away. They excessively searched us in my opinion (they checked my pockets at least 3 times each on different occassions). One of my friends which was female resisted due to them twisting her arm too far up her back and tried to get them to ease up but that just resulted in two officers grappling and slamming her even more against the fence.

The search resulted in them finding a sling-shot on my friend. They tricked him into an involuntary and untrue confession which most definately will be used against him in court. He was standing next to me so this is what I picked up from their conversation when I wasn't being manhandled by the officer behind me.

Officer: Why do you have a sling-shot in your bag?
Friend: It's for protection.
Officer: So you're telling me you're going to use this against me?
Friend: No, it's just for protection.
Officer: You just told me that you're going to use this against me!

That to my knowledge is what I remember of their conversation. The rest was concealed by my officer pushing me and asking me inane questions.

After the ordeal, they ordered us to all turn around as one of the many officers panned over each of us slowly with a video camera, documenting each one of us for their little "suspicious character" logs then repeatedly shined the light in our eyes. They put our sling-shot comrade in the car and released all from their custody. They then informed us that "they had suspicion that we had illegal materials on us" which is complete bullshit. It was solely because we were dressed in black and had our faces concealed. They hassled people before us doing the same eariler that day. They got off because hundreds of the protestors we angerly shouting to let them go. Since we were out of reach, they got to hassle us as good and long as they pleased.

His bail for tonight is set at $25,000 and will be arraigned tomorrow for the felony charge of "possession of a deadly weapon" and any other goodies they can muster up.

This is not just a precautionary act taken by the police. This is them making it very clear that 'Black Bloc' and 'Black Bloc' associated people are not welcomed in their presence and they will be harrassed if seen. This is the police-state I've been whining about for the past months following the Patriot Act. This is what tomorrow is going to be like. They're taking over our protests. They're taking over our right to assemble. Does this need to happen to you before you realize this just isn't an Orwell book or the rants of a smelly hippie? This is reality, our reality. This is the terrorism.

If anyone has any legal advice or can offer any assistance for our fallen comrade, it would be greatly appreciated. As of now, I see he has no chance at a winnable case. He is yet another political prisoner being taken off the list of politically threatening people to the state. If you have any info or would like to contribute any knowledge or advice, please contact me via e-mail at soup_ignorant@hotmail.com. Thanks. Never submit, stand the ground which is rightfully yours.

Your "comrade" brings a frickin' SLINGSHOT to a deomstration, but the police are fascists? What was he hunting, squirrels? He brought it to shoot at police, be real. Dumb shit. He deserves whatever he gets.

Thank God there's Americans with common sense still in America. While the patriotic Americans, the heros of America, our troops, are out there laying their lives on the line, we still have these dirty America bashers attacking Bush and the military's mission.

Yeah, burning American flags and going to Communist rallies are really 'patriotic' . That's a great lie that they keep on telling us.

SUPPORT AMERICA AND THE TROOPS!

A slingshot is not a defensive weapon, it's purely offensive. Quite deadly when loaded with hard steal object or rock. When you wear a mask to hide your identity at a protest, your up to no good.

soup ignorant - you and your comrades are truly ignorant!

Sounds like the police higher ups are trying to coax the
black block into performing an ambush with this silly harassment and poor weak support units, it seems similar
to the small unit lure in Viet Nam as the enemy is enticed into counter attacking by increased provocations from smaller units of MPA. This then justifies the increased
budgets of and for the Police/military/prison industry.
Systemic action is far more efficient for fucking up the
fragile infrastructure that allows the nation to operate.
Care should be taken to allow food and water to move unhampered into the communities. Public transportation corridors and services should be held as sacred not withstanding periodic harassment.
Do not destroy selected communication links after establishing alternate independent links if necessary..
Do not fuck with the personal lives of the
individuals who manage the media and/or
disrupt or override the propaganda programing.
Do not do banner drops or other public displays.
Do not perform acts of economic disruption such as
selected mass boycott.
Do not organize citizen mutual support groups.
Do not endeavor to reach out to sympathetic members of
the law or military.
Do not store water or food, etc.
Let keep this country operating smoothly.

JA's post is really confusing. So what do you mean, don't do shit and let
the system steamrole over the american people. Systematic efforts do
not always work (look at how the UN has crumbled under US pressure).
Sometimes its good to have people who work inside and outside of the
state. Sometimes using what is called "the discourse of violence" is
necessary, especially when the state leaves you no options. I do not
fully support all of the actions of the black bloc, but I wouldn't censor them
either. In this crisis, the major news media is not our ally and, judging by
the blatantly propagandistic mode that they have taken since before the
bombs started dropping, they're going to distort even the actions of peaceful
demonstrators. The police are not our ally now either, since in a time of
war their function is to protect the interests of the state.

Big fucking deal if a Black Bloc kid had a slingshot. Yes, dangerous objects
could be dislodged, but an automatic weapon from a cop in bulletproof
riot gear and a helmet leaves you dead.

As for the other neanderthals who responded, get a brain and learn what
real democracy is about (free speech, right to protest), learn about
repression in other dictatorial nations, including the ones the US is
friendly with, like China, or some of the "coalition of the spineless," I mean
"the willing" and then compare that with what you are starting to see now
where dissent is being silenced in the US. It is your ignorance that is turning
this nation into something similar to the so-called "communist" dictatorships
that you despise.

NO WAR

BRING THE TROOPS HOME NOW

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!!!

He didn't bring it to shoot anything. It was in his backpack time before that he never got around to taking out. We brought a van to the protest too, did we start running over all the cops? We brought drum sticks, did we impale all the cops? Where the fuck do you expect him to start using it on cops? He had his chance to. He didn't pull it out at any time at the protest or as we were making our way back to our car. They were throwing Black Bloc kids against the wall making them take off their bandannas and telling them they can't have their flags because they're weapons. Why were they the only ones to be told that the wood used can be used as weapons? What about the other hundreds of protesters with potential "weapons"? We were targetted because of the way we looked, not because we were doing anything illegal.

The above was intended for T Light. Not Rally.

Most cities do have and ordnance on what is expectable to be used for mounting signs to, most of the time the ordinances are not enforced. When the protest are repetitive and incline to get out of hand the ordinances start getting enforced. Common sense tells you that signs attached to steal polls, long wooden polls or baseball bats are easily turned into weapons. Check with the city you plan on rallying in for guidance on what you can affix your sign to, in general a piece of wood 36" long by 2" x 1/2" may be expectable, but check.

I support Our Troops and President Bush, but let us demonstrate our views safely.

Please excuse my error and replace "expectable" with acceptable, lack of attention to details. One more thing if your going to a rally that has any potential for getting out of hand, check your pockets and backpack for things the could be a problem.

Do not believe me. Eveything I say ia a lie.

What a great day to be a disgruntled starbucks employee, bike messenger, or old hippy!

Finally, a day to feel important -- we have something to do.

Keep it good, hot and coming. We the Supporters of Our Troops and President have so much to do and so little time to do it in.

We have the right to bear arms against our government if it opresses our liberty. But once again, a woos with a gun is afraid of a young anarchist with a slingshot. Too bad all cops are such cowards, it makes me feel really unsafe that the men allowed to carry guns are really more afraid for their own sorry asses than the public they are supposed to protect. As far as I know, police do not make up the whole public. As far as I know, police rarely protect anyone either. 911 is a joke in this town.

...how the people who "support our troops" UND DER Fuhrer are among the most unsympathetic anti-American posters on the Board.

You compare the president to Hitler and you expect to be treated with respect? You can't see why people might think of you as a nutjob and not give you "sympathy" because of your extreme (actually super-extreme) views of comparing the President to Adolph Hitler?! Are you missing the irony, here, Diogenes?

They are not anti-American. They just are anti-you.

Precisely like hitler in the method of operation
let's see, motive?
opportunity?
Time for a trial by the people.

"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in
England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after
all, It is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is
always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a
democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any
country."

Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg trials,
1946

I have no sympathy for the Anti-war protesters. If they are not following the police instructions for keeping their protest out of the way of traffic, either let the police move them along or let me run over their sorry asses!

They ought to run over the Bastards with Tanks. Imagine thinking that they have the right to oppose our beloved Fuhrer.

What do they think this is? America?

Sounds like a good idea, but one problem, not enough protesters and the tank treads will be damaging to the roadway

maximum brutality. minimum compassion.

you just lost more reasonable people.

They got these neat eight wheeled armored
troop carriers with a 130mm big gun.
Aluminum chasis. LAVs

Two moronic lefty jackasses. Where do I start?
1) The Black bloc from the git is supposed to be unidentifiable from each other. That's the reason for all black clothes and bandanas. So if one decides to throw a rock, bottle, or SHOOT A GODDAM SLINGSHOT, the cops don't know whom to go after. THAT is why they took off your stylish bandanas. AND why they took your signs. The rest of the protestors were exercising their rights, and God bless 'em, deluded though they are.
2) Automatic Weapons. Do you seriously think even if your comrade HAD used his slingshot, they cops would have responded with rock and roll? You stupid bastard. Yeah , it would have gotten ugly real fast, and a lot of innocent people would have gotten hurt, but even a fool like you can't imagine LAPD mowin' 'em down on Wilshire.
3) The cops in time of war and peace are to protect citizens and property. If I had a business down there, and it got out of hand, the cops better come quick or I would shoot your sorry, black-clad asses myself.
4) And "it was in his backpack but he didn't take it out?" Christ, what's next, "my little brother spilled milk on it?" USE YOUR FUCKIN' HEADS! You have a right to protest, but you Black Bloc assholes are just BEGGING for trouble. Yeah, you were targeted for the way you looked. Any problems were coming from you.

I always go through everything in my possession incase I overlooked something I may have accidently stuck or even had planted(?) but he really messed up. Given, the cops tatics and way they went about this whole deal was underhanded and cowardly but it all can't be blamed on the cops. First thing is first, protect yourself. That means have nothing incriminating they can use against you. I asked everyone if they had any shit the cops could hold against us to everyone with me when we noticed them monitoring us but I guess he truly had forgotten it was in his bag. I've known him for a while and it's highly unlikely that'd he'd use it on anyone. Even beneath his peace-associated patches and vegetarian life style, he's still a friendly, warm character and that's why I feel bad my warning wasn't heeded to lose anything 'illegal'.

I'm really not in the mood to argue with you and your imbecile kind right now. Expect a counter-post later today.

Your friend may well be all that you say and it's great that you feel that way about him. The police have no understanding who he is, so when there are confrontations they will error on the side of caution. In the future as you and your friends have learned, carry ID and nothing that can be missunderstood.

Even though we have opposing views I do not wish you ill will.

Jeez, how am I supposed to get to sleep tonight? Now I'm all atwitter.
Bring it, meat.

wow
tuff guy
wow

Tha'ts really ignorant..How about the police following the guidelines of Freedom of Speech, or Freedom to Assemble..Your selfish, outlook isn't surprising...The fact you want to run people over is really sickening, though, and I feel sad that the system has led you to believe that students, workers, youth, hippies, anarchists, are "The Enemy"...cover your eyes a little more to block out all the Money-Hungry corporations, corrupt politicians, brutal officers, the killers in those fighter jets, and in those tanks...Yeah, and we're the ones that are violent hooligans..... You want to run us over for being in the street, so what's really going on......

Oh, when I was burning American flags and killing innocent police officers, I realized something horrible. The police enforce the law and they won't let me break the law! The type of bullshit is that?!

What the fuck have we come to when we can't openly attack American infidels without being surpressed by the evil pigs? Destroy America! Revolution! Let's all circle jerk with Hussein!

You people for "peace" for the Iraqi people are morons. Here's is your proof. And it will ONLY GET BIGGER. Are you starting to feel stupid yet?

"No Saddam Hussein!" one young man in headscarf told Gurfein. "Bush!"


U.S. Marines Rip Down Saddam Portraits
1 hour, 5 minutes ago

By ELLEN KNICKMEYER, Associated Press Writer

Milling crowds of men and boys watched as the Marines attached ropes on the front of their Jeeps to one portrait and then backed up, peeling the Iraqi leader's black-and-white metal image off a frame. Some locals briefly joined Maj. David "Bull" Gurfein in a new cheer.


"Iraqis! Iraqis! Iraqis!" Gurfein yelled, pumping his fist in the air.


"We wanted to send a message that Saddam is done," said Gurfein, a New York native in the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. "People are scared to show a lot of emotion. That's why we wanted to show them this time we're here, and Saddam is done."


The Marines arrived in Safwan, just across the Kuwait border, after Cobra attack helicopters, attack jets, tanks, 155 mm howitzers and sharpshooters cleared the way along Route 80, the main road into Iraq (news - web sites).


Safwan, 375 miles south of Baghdad, is a poor, dirty, wrecked town pocked by shrapnel from the last Gulf war (news - web sites). Iraqi forces in the area sporadically fired mortars and guns for hours Thursday and Friday. Most townspeople hid, although residents brought forth a wounded little girl, her palm bleeding after the new fighting. Another man said his wife was shot in the leg by the Americans.


A few men and boys ventured out, putting makeshift white flags on their pickup trucks or waving white T-shirts out truck windows.


"Americans very good," Ali Khemy said. "Iraq wants to be free."


Some chanted, "Ameriki! Ameriki!"


Many others in the starving town just patted their stomachs and raised their hands, begging for food.


A man identifying himself only as Abdullah welcomed the arrival of the U.S. troops: "Saddam Hussein is no good. Saddam Hussein a butcher."


An old woman shrouded in black — one of the very few women outside — knelt toward the feet of Americans, embracing an American woman. A younger man with her pulled her away, giving her a warning sign by sliding his finger across his throat.


In 1991, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died after prematurely celebrating what they believed was their liberation from Saddam after the Gulf War. Some even pulled down a few pictures of Saddam then — only to be killed by Iraqi forces.


Gurfein playfully traded pats with a disabled man and turned down a dinner invitation from townspeople.


"Friend, friend," he told them in Arabic learned in the first Gulf War.


"We stopped in Kuwait that time," he said. "We were all ready to come up there then, and we never did."


The townspeople seemed grateful this time.


"No Saddam Hussein!" one young man in headscarf told Gurfein. "Bush!"

The New X
by The New X • Thursday March 20, 2003 Thut 04:33 PM



the fear that Saddam will attack the US with WMD shows how PARANOID americans are.

they don't really know why he will attack
they just know he will

"we don't know what a nigger is, but we're just gonna hate 'em anyway"

AMERICAN HYPOCRISY

TO ANY PRO-WAR ADVOCATE
I DARE YOU TO REPLY TO THIS:

The US government supported Saddam during his most murderous years. They supplied him with WMD and the technology to make his own WMD. EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A KNOWN TYRANT. Why? So that he would use them on the Iranians. Even after Halabja in 1988, the US government CONTINUED to support him.

Now in the year 2003 (whether it is morally just or not), Saddam no longer wishes to play into US global strategy. So he is ALL OF A SUDDEN branded a TYRANT ------ EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A MURDEROUS TYRANT ALL THE YEARS THE US SUPPORTED HIM!

Isn't it hypocritical that although he was even more murderous back then, he was considered an ALLY and FRIEND OF AMERICA simply because he was killing Iranians (if 5,000 kurds happened to be gassed in a single attack thats no big deal). Now he's still murderous but now the US actually acknowledges that he is a tyrant. Imagine if he was still following US wishes by fighting with Iraq, would the US be calling him a TYRANT? I DON'T THINK SO.

HYPOCRISY HYPOCRISY HYPOCRISY.

Until the US apologizes to the victims of Saddam terror DURING THE YEARS THAT THEY SUPPORTED HIM, this war will only be about US PARANOIA and its attempts at gaining a FALSE sense of security.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

war advocates only want to see sand nigger blood being spilled. they try to improve the body count
2,500 Americans (WTC) < 100,000 Sand Niggers.

So they can feel better about themselves and feel as if they "won" the overall battle. Their oh so precious American pride was hurt on 9/11 and now they seek to get it back by killing sand niggers left rite and center

(basically this is the whole starship troopers scenario)

go here http://www.outwar.com/page.php?x=490159 for info on all the anti-war protests in the world

I really love the way all you PATRIOTIC PROTESTERS are wasting our tax dollers!!! All that money it takes for police, medical personel, city workers to clean up your mess and many other tax expenditures. It's a real great idea to bunch up when ever possible...that way we can give terrorist a great big clear target so they can fuck us up somemore...what a fucking invitation to mass murder some more us. Someone said that we used to support saten hussain and now we decide not to...that's like saying that all white americans that live today are guilty of supporting slavory...Does anyone really think that our president or our people support saten hussain??? BULLSHIT!!! Protest for something that really needs attention..like all the people in america that are hungery and homeless. Would you lay your ass in the fucking street for them???If you say yes let us see your asses on tv helping americans instead of waiting for more devils to kill you or your friends or family..will you protest when your own people are chokeing on antrax or some nerve agent or nuclier radiation???Lay in the fucking road and show all those demons responsible for september 11th what it looks like when they kill several thousand people...can you all depict what it looks like when there are only bits and peaces of our loved ones and we have to use dna to recognize our family and freinds??? I could go on forever but i think ive said what i want to and i didn't even have to do anything illegal to get my point across. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!GOD BLESS YOU'LL AND GOD BLESS OUR PRESIDENT!!! (His job is very difficult and he does not have absolute power to declare war..our government consist of many more people than just a president) I don't hear anyone blaming our vice president or any other of our government people...Peace has a very big price...LIVE FREE AND DIE WELL

Oh wow. Now we’re human shields right here in the land o free.
I think the real cowards are sitting at home watching the TV.
It does take a bit of courage to show your patriotism and beliefs in a
just cause. If we were frightened for ourselves, we wouldn’t be out in the streets.
It’s not only the people of Iraq that we are concerned about. It’s you
in the military who are and will be used to be thrown into the trash once your dirty work is done.
We want you home and safe. NOW.

...when was the Constitutionally Required Declaration of War Passed by the Congress? I must have missed that. Can you cite the Bill Number and date of Passage?

Hey Diogenes, where were you on Oct. 10, 2002?

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/10/iraq.us/

"Bush wins Daschle's support"

The Senate is expected to hold a final vote on the measure late Thursday or early Friday. Thursday morning, Majority Leader Tom Daschle announced he will support Bush on Iraq, saying it is important for the country "to speak with one voice at this critical moment."

HAR! Funny!

...to take the bait Airic. The authorization passed by Congress was:

A. Conditioned on the existence of proof that Iraq took part in the 911 attack. No such proof exists.

B. Is arguably unconstitutional because the Constitution grants to the Congress ONLY the legal right to declare War in the name of the United States. They have NO Constitutional Authority to delegate that power and decision. The framers of the Constitution, if you bother to read their writings, were quite clear on this being an ESSENTIAL part of the seperation of powers. They regarded it as a great threat to the security of the Republic to place War Making Powers at the discretion of the Executive (President - since you probably do not know what Executive means in our Government).

In short, as always, you betray your ignorance and stupidity. You are NOT a patriot.

and not opinionated speculation...

A. State your source. Preferably the specific subsections of said resolution in question.

B. Arguably unconstitutional? Who decided that? You? Pahlease.

A. Do your own fucking homework if you know so much.

B. Read the fucking Constitution and then tell me which section authorizes the President to unilaterally commence a war or for Congress to delegate that authority to him.

The Most Dreaded Enemy of Liberty
James Madison, August 1793

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. . . . [There is also an] inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and . . . degeneracy of manners and of morals. . . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. . . .

[It should be well understood] that the powers proposed to be surrendered [by the Third Congress] to the Executive were those which the Constitution has most jealously appropriated to the Legislature. . . .

The Constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the Legislature the power of declaring a state of war. . . the power of raising armies. . . the power of creating offices. . . .

A delegation of such powers [to the President] would have struck, not only at the fabric of our Constitution, but at the foundation of all well organized and well checked governments.

The separation of the power of declaring war from that of conducting it, is wisely contrived to exclude the danger of its being declared for the sake of its being conducted.

The separation of the power of raising armies from the power of commanding them, is intended to prevent the raising of armies for the sake of commanding them.

The separation of the power of creating offices from that of filling them, is an essential guard against the temptation to create offices for the sake of gratifying favourites or multiplying dependents.

No matter how you slice it, Diogenes' argument fails to hold water.

A. The burden of proof is on you. We're waiting. C'mon man, innocent people are dying for Christ's sake. You should at least be prepared to back up your "facts".

B. Constitutionality is a matter for the courts to decide. Not some opinionated liberal on an internet forum. I suggest you file a lawsuit against the government and prove your case. Better hurry. Again, innocent people are dying.

Tick tock. Tick tock. Tick tock.

And from the left we get...

nada.

FACT BOX

• "The president is authorized to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq, and (2) enforce all relevant United Nation Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."

• The resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of any military action against Iraq and submit, at least every 60 days, a report to Congress on the military campaign.

• The resolution does not tie any U.S. action to a U.N. resolution.

You wouldn't be able to small shit if you fell face first into it.

You're right. I don't know how to "small shit". Never learned that one. What are they teaching you guys at the Universities these days?

Somebody named Diogenes needs to read the War Powers Act of 1973. In detail. Fast. Before he sticks his foot in his mouth. Again.

The War Powers Act of 1973
Public Law 93-148
93rd Congress, H. J. Res. 542
November 7, 1973
Joint Resolution
Concerning the war powers of Congress and the President.
Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SHORT TITLE
SECTION 1.
This joint resolution may be cited as the "War Powers Resolution".
PURPOSE AND POLICY
SEC. 2. (a)
It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicate by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.
SEC. 2. (b)
Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
SEC. 2. (c)
The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
CONSULTATION
SEC. 3.
The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.
REPORTING
Sec. 4. (a)
In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced--
(1)
into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2)
into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3)
(A)
the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B)
the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C)
the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.
Sec. 4. (b)
The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad.
Sec. 4. (c)
Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he report to the Congress less often than once every six months.
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION
SEC. 5. (a)
Each report submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1) shall be transmitted to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate on the same calendar day. Each report so transmitted shall be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate for appropriate action. If, when the report is transmitted, the Congress has adjourned sine die or has adjourned for any period in excess of three calendar days, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate, if they deem it advisable (or if petitioned by at least 30 percent of the membership of their respective Houses) shall jointly request the President to convene Congress in order that it may consider the report and take appropriate action pursuant to this section.
SEC. 5. (b)
Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1), whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.
SEC. 5. (c)
Notwithstanding subsection (b), at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.
CONGRESSIONAL PRIORITY PROCEDURES FOR JOINT RESOLUTION OR BILL
SEC. 6. (a)
Any joint resolution or bill introduced pursuant to section 5(b) at least thirty calendar days before the expiration of the sixty-day period specified in such section shall be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives or the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, as the case may be, and such committee shall report one such joint resolution or bill, together with its recommendations, not later than twenty-four calendar days before the expiration of the sixty-day period specified in such section, unless such House shall otherwise determine by the yeas and nays.
SEC. 6. (b)
Any joint resolution or bill so reported shall become the pending business of the House in question (in the case of the Senate the time for debate shall be equally divided between the proponents and the opponents), and shall be voted on within three calendar days thereafter, unless such House shall otherwise determine by yeas and nays.
SEC. 6. (c)
Such a joint resolution or bill passed by one House shall be referred to the committee of the other House named in subsection (a) and shall be reported out not later than fourteen calendar days before the expiration of the sixty-day period specified in section 5(b). The joint resolution or bill so reported shall become the pending business of the House in question and shall be voted on within three calendar days after it has been reported, unless such House shall otherwise determine by yeas and nays.
SEC 6. (d)
In the case of any disagreement between the two Houses of Congress with respect to a joint resolution or bill passed by both Houses, conferees shall be promptly appointed and the committee of conference shall make and file a report with respect to such resolution or bill not later than four calendar days before the expiration of the sixty-day period specified in section 5(b). In the event the conferees are unable to agree within 48 hours, they shall report back to their respective Houses in disagreement. Notwithstanding any rule in either House concerning the printing of conference reports in the Record or concerning any delay in the consideration of such reports, such report shall be acted on by both Houses not later than the expiration of such sixty-day period.
CONGRESSIONAL PRIORITY PROCEDURES FOR CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
SEC. 7. (a)
Any concurrent resolution introduced pursuant to section 5(b) at least thirty calendar days before the expiration of the sixty-day period specified in such section shall be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives or the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, as the case may be, and one such concurrent resolution shall be reported out by such committee together with its recommendations within fifteen calendar days, unless such House shall otherwise determine by the yeas and nays.
SEC. 7. (b)
Any concurrent resolution so reported shall become the pending business of the House in question (in the case of the Senate the time for debate shall be equally divided between the proponents and the opponents), and shall be voted on within three calendar days thereafter, unless such House shall otherwise determine by yeas and nays.
SEC. 7. (c)
Such a concurrent resolution passed by one House shall be referred to the committee of the other House named in subsection (a) and shall be reported out by such committee together with its recommendations within fifteen calendar days and shall thereupon become the pending business of such House and shall be voted on within three calendar days after it has been reported, unless such House shall otherwise determine by yeas and nays.
SEC. 7. (d)
In the case of any disagreement between the two Houses of Congress with respect to a concurrent resolution passed by both Houses, conferees shall be promptly appointed and the committee of conference shall make and file a report with respect to such concurrent resolution within six calendar days after the legislation is referred to the committee of conference. Notwithstanding any rule in either House concerning the printing of conference reports in the Record or concerning any delay in the consideration of such reports, such report shall be acted on by both Houses not later than six calendar days after the conference report is filed. In the event the conferees are unable to agree within 48 hours, they shall report back to their respective Houses in disagreement.
INTERPRETATION OF JOINT RESOLUTION
SEC. 8. (a)
Authority to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations wherein involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances shall not be inferred--
(1)
from any provision of law (whether or not in effect before the date of the enactment of this joint resolution), including any provision contained in any appropriation Act, unless such provision specifically authorizes the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations and stating that it is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this joint resolution; or
(2)
from any treaty heretofore or hereafter ratified unless such treaty is implemented by legislation specifically authorizing the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations and stating that it is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this joint resolution.
SEC. 8. (b)
Nothing in this joint resolution shall be construed to require any further specific statutory authorization to permit members of United States Armed Forces to participate jointly with members of the armed forces of one or more foreign countries in the headquarters operations of high-level military commands which were established prior to the date of enactment of this joint resolution and pursuant to the United Nations Charter or any treaty ratified by the United States prior to such date.
SEC 8. (c)
For purposes of this joint resolution, the term "introduction of United States Armed Forces" includes the assignment of member of such armed forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities.
SEC. 8. (d)
Nothing in this joint resolution--
(1)
is intended to alter the constitutional authority of the Congress or of the President, or the provision of existing treaties; or
(2)
shall be construed as granting any authority to the President with respect to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations wherein involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances which authority he would not have had in the absence of this joint resolution.
SEPARABILITY CLAUSE
SEC. 9. If any provision of this joint resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the joint resolution and the application of such provision to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.
EFFECTIVE DATE
SEC. 10. This joint resolution shall take effect on the date of its enactment.
CARL ALBERT

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

JAMES O. EASTLAND

President of the Senate pro tempore.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S.,
November 7, 1973.
The House of Representatives having proceeded to reconsider the resolution (H. J. Res 542) entitled "Joint resolution concerning the war powers of Congress and the President", returned by the President of the United States with his objections, to the House of Representatives, in which it originated, it was
Resolved, That the said resolution pass, two-thirds of the House of Representatives agreeing to pass the same.

Attest:

W. PAT JENNINGS

Clerk.

I certify that this Joint Resolution originated in the House of Representatives.

W. PAT JENNINGS

Clerk.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
November 7, 1973
The Senate having proceeded to reconsider the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 542) entitled "Joint resolution concerning the war powers of Congress and the President", returned by the President of the United States with his objections to the House of Representatives, in which it originate, it was
Resolved, That the said joint resolution pass, two-thirds of the Senators present having voted in the affirmative.

Attest:

FRANCIS R. VALEO

Secretary.


Acknowledgments
This file obtained from byrd.mu.wvnet.edu
Contributed by: "Andrew M. Ross" <aross@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>

...has never been put to the test in court but it is arguably unconstitutional.

And Airic you are the one inventing things not found in the Constitution. I have nothing to prove - my case rests on the text of the Constitution. The vacancy of your arguments is proved by your inability to cite anything relevant in the Constitution - which is the Supreme Law of the Land.

You are an idiot and a traitor to your country by adhering to it's "domestic enemies".

>The War Powers Act has never been put to the test in court but it is arguably unconstitutional.

Sorry Charlie. It's the law. If you want to challenge the law, go for it. Until then, it's the law. As is the Patriot Act.

Whatsa matter? Can't admit when you're worng? Another weakness of the pro-Saddam appeaser left. And another notch in your eventual demise. And deaths.

I've invented nothing. Unlike you, I don't hold "The Constitution" to be the end-all be-all. It's more of a guideline than a rule. Throughout history it has always been open to interpretation. And that interpretation has always been a matter for the courts. Ammendments were made time and time again. Freedom of the press. Right to bare arms. Blacks get to vote. Women get to vote. So on and so on and yada yada yada.

I support the President. I support the war effort. I support the troops. I don't have to prove squat. I'm getting my way.

You on the other hand need to prove to me (and the other 70% of the population) that we're wrong.

And you're not doing a very good job.

name calling, conjecture, hearsay, speculation, and blather does not an argument make.

...if you support the Furher Bush so much, can you tell me why you are not over there in Iraq in some military unit? Why are you sitting here on your butt, guzzling beer and most likely driving your SUV around.

Put your money where you mouth is or...STFU, OK?

You are so totally boring...uninformed and out of line, that I am sorry for anyone who really has to spend time around you and does not merely have to skip over your drivel on a message board.

ERIC = FREEPER CREEP. Go home, Ugly American.

>if you support the Furher ....blah blah blah blah blah

Yeah. Whatever.

How do you know that I'm not?

How do you know that, if in fact I am not, that I'm not supporting the war effort in other ways? Perhaps I work for the governement as an undercover propagandist, trying to convince liberals to mend their evil ways. Perhaps I'm in Quatar at the military headquarters performing special ops. Maybe I'm a spook. Maybe I'm doing one of hundres of other jobs required to keep this machine in gear, other than ground-pounding and pulling a trigger on the front lines.

And maybe I served this country for 11 years previously, and now I serve her in "other" ways. Maybe, my days of killing for my country are over. Maybe I'm too old, or too weak. Or maybe, I'm just waiting for them to call me back.

Maybe.

Funny how liberals get their panties all in a wad and start all that name calling when they are getting their asses kicked in a debate. And everybody is just a "freeper" that doesn't agree with them or slants right. Funny liberals. It's like talking to a spoiled child. What a brat.

Don't they know they'll never convince us, and hence never get their way, by acting like that?

I didn't know that liberals wear panties. Does that mean I have to stop wearing them? Also, how does one go about winning an argument? I'm still waiting for a conservative to show me how. So far, they've been unable to.

go play on the interstate next time in dense fog!

How about taking me down the Hershey Highway, mister hippie hater conservative?

- Unlike you, I don't hold "The Constitution" to be the end-all be-all.- Thank you adolph, for your loyalty to the law of the land and the people. Your loyalty is only to yourself and other scum who suck the life out of our (not your) country.
And as for the 70% approval, I don't believe it. I have a service job and the common folk are rarely in approval of the lunatic in the offal office. Maybe one in seven, and these are usually mean, stupid or lawyers. Right down your alley.

I'm on a roll baby! I'm headed to Vegas!

No, it is I who is a traitor. After all, I am the one who is shredding both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

It's a big conspiracy man. The government man, they're the blame man. They're fooling everyone man. Sneaky bastards man. They covered up that Pearl Harbor thing, then that Oswald patsy guy, oh and that Area 51 stuff man. Sneaky bastards I tell ya.

What's a conspiracy? I was told by Fox News to believe everything my Uncle Sam tells me.

Whoa...don't include me in those who think Bush is great or even OK. I have been out on the peace lines, in the rain, and standing there for Peace. I don't drive a Mercedes or even a new car. I am an LA County Public Defender. Not all lawyers are Republican and conservative. Most of us who have dealt with the system over the years are exactly the opposite. We know how corrupt it is.

I find that most of my lawyer friends are NOT in support of Bush or his policies. We are embarrassed by him. I used to think that I could not be more embarrassed by a President than when Ronnie Reagan was in office. (Richard Nixon was a close tie, too.) I find that I am wrong. The fact the George Bush is in the White House makes me ashamed to be an American. He is, IMO, a war criminal. Too bad he will never be prosecuted for his crimes against humanity.

For those of you who allegedly support our troops, please go to the VA Hospital on Wilshire and volunteer some of your time. I do and have done so since the Vietnam conflict even though I demonstrated against the war back then. It is not the troops who are evil - it is the leaders that send them to be maimed and killed in the name of "liberation." The Vietnam Vets need your support. Most of them do NOT support Bush. They know the true horrors of war when they were sent overseas at the ages of 18, 19 or 20. Talk to them and learn the truth. They need your help. They are in their 50's and 60's right now...and the horrors of Vietnam still haunt most of them. Ask the ones with drug problems when and where they got hooked. Your eyes will be opened.

For those of you in America Supporting Americans, get yourself ready - the American troops from the Iraqi War are going to come home just the same as those from Vietnam. Those of you who are still lucky enough to have a father, a friend or a relative who fought in WWII, talk to them, too. This was, for lack of better terms, a "just" war and these men still live with the horrors of what they saw. My father, bless his heart, who died in July 2000, to the time of his death had nightmares of what he saw and did in the was in the South Pacific.

Face it: WAR IS HELL. We visit this hell on the young men of our nation. At this time, in the Iraqi War, there is NO cause for this.

Thank you, George Bush, for another generation of the "walking wounded." You cut VA spending and ask another generation to fight an old man's war. Take a long hard look at the homeless Vets who camp out in the VA cemetary across from the Wilshire Federal Building. Those we are sending to Iraq today we will see in 20 years in the same place.

END THIS WAR NOW!!!!

"Those we are sending to Iraq today we will see in 20 years in the same place."

You make this sound like a bad thing.

The administration that freed the hostages in Iran and won the cold war, an embarassment? You must be freaking kidding. Please tell us your name, so we'll know if we ever get you as our defender to request a new lawyer on the grounds of your incompetency.

And even Nixon had the sense enough and the respect enough for the office to resign when he knew he'd been beaten. Clinton didn't even have that. Duh. They're gonna impeach me Hilliary! But I really didn't have sexual relations with that woman!

Ever hear of the IRAN-CONTRA SCANDAL? You really ARE retarded, aren't you? I must go now, as Ronnie has shit his diaper again.

It is a bad thing. If you are ever on the West Coast, pay a visit to the VA Hospital on Wilshire. It is an eye opener. During the 60's, I volunteered in Long Beach...when they were sending what was left of some of our soldiers home to "recover." They have not. That is why I say in 20 years, you will see the boys we are sending to Iraq today in the same situation.

If you think it is a good thing, I just cannot agree with you.

Ronald Reagan is and was a lousy president. You need to read your history books. As to being incompetent, your opinion means -0- or less to me.

As to Nixon resigning, you put this as though he was going to do so voluntarily. I don't know how old you are, but I lived through all of this. He was about to be impeached. He had two choices: Resign or be impeached. I will agree that he chose the better course, but let's be honest: What else could he do? IMO, his resignation was nothing more or less than a "nolo" plea to some very bad charges.

Read about it. You might learn something. The votes were there to impeach him.

As for my age, I'm twelve. Most of us conservatives who troll Indymedia are that age or younger.

No shit?? Really? Thanks for the info.

Here's some for you: Clinton was impeached.

Wow, you really ARE an oblivious idiot, aren't you? Did Fox News tell you that Clinton was impeached? They did? Why, then, it MUST be true!

If so, then it is you, and not I, that is the idiot.

If you STILL don't know who the idiot is, just look into a mirror.

They are SPIN. Look who their corporate sponsors are. Think they tell the truth? Boy, you really are only 12 years old.

Yes I am. So what? Who cares if I'm a child? I know alto about politics because my mommy said so.

Yes I am. So what? Who cares if I'm a child? I know alot about politics because my mommy said so.

indymedia liberals called me and idiot, oh boo hoo hoo. and a traitor too boo hoo hoo. and they think Clinton wasn't impeached!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

idiots.

You are on restriction. :-)

Ahhh, c'mon, mommy!!! Can I at least suck on your tits?

I have met some lawyers who have heart and the principles
of the constitution in their life.
I meant attorneys, the kind that decide just how far the
law can be bent to accommodate the client who can afford their services in order to avoid the principle if not the letter of the law. I will try to remember that there are
honorable lawyers despite the garbage we endure at this
forum. Some of these individuals are just plain slimy.
Again I apologize for my overly wide brush stroke.

Ron was the 11th highest ranking President in the history of this county, as determined by the opinions of the American people.


http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/historians/39.asp


idiots.

Those were the results from the "Historians" that were surveyed.

The regular people think Ron was #6:

http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/viewer/39.asp

And that's why I think Reagan was such a great president. A bunch of oblivious fascists in a poll SAID so.

slick willy is number 36.

http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/viewer/41.asp

for you lazy assed liberals:

http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/viewer/overall.asp

No problem. And thanks for the apology. Very gracious of you to do so.

Regards,

LA Lawyer

My mommy says that I know alot about politics.

Even Nixon got ranked in the top 20. Clinton in the bottom 6. Bush-daddy #16.

Not enough data on junior yet though. Bet he ranks in the top 10 though when they get there. Anybody wanna take me up on that bet?

I've got a thousand greenbacks where my mouth is.

I figured one of you fat cat lawyers would be willing to put your money where your mouths are.

I guess not. Typical. None of you idiots have probably ever even been to trial.

BTW, did I mention that Lawyers are the scum of the Earth? They rank just below liberals. I saw that on a CSPAN survey somewhere.

Hey, not ALL lawyers are the scum of the Earth. After all, they are keeping me out of jail. Not that I wouldn't mind jail. I hear that you can get all the cock you want in jail.

Airic you are such a colossal buffoon I really don’t know where to begin.

Let’s take one your grander statements of ignorance:

“I've invented nothing. Unlike you, I don't hold "The Constitution" to be the end-all be-all. It's more of a guideline than a rule. Throughout history it has always been open to interpretation. And that interpretation has always been a matter for the courts. Amendments were made time and time again. Freedom of the press. Right to bare arms.”

That paragraph is of such abysmal ignorance that there is no way to correct every fallacy in one short post. It is like running into a brick wall - it bespeaks such vast ignorance and contempt for the principles that established this nation as the shining beacon of freedom that it just takes my breath away. Airic I really think you should move to some Third World Dictatorship more in keeping with your philosophy. Your post echoes those just principles of governance established by such “Great Men” as: Kaiser Wilhelm, Ghengis Khan, Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Adolph Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and oh yeah - Gee duhbya. Of course Duhbya hasn’t quite made it into their league yet but you do have to give him “credit” for trying.

Let’s take that first line: “I've invented nothing. Unlike you, I don't hold "The Constitution" to be the end-all be-all. It's more of a guideline than a rule.”
I am sure the founders would absolutely amazed at your brilliant insight. It sounds virtually identical to the mouthings of the totalitarian left who believe in a “flexible Constitution”. Translation: “It means whatever we say it means now sit down and shut up or I’ll have you shot.”

The position you take is no different than that of the Stalinist left. Speech with which you disagree becomes “counterrevolutionary” or “revisionist heresy”. This is absolutely Un-American.

Ignorance, when voluntary, is criminal, and a man me be properly charged with that evil which he neglected or refused to learn how to prevent. - Samuel Johnson

Let us alleviate some of your ignorance - assuming of course that you are capable of learning:

“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its power in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. “
- Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence

You see Airic this country and it’s Constitution were established under a regime of LIMITED POWERS that were DELEGATED to the government by it’s Free Citizens. Rights do not flow from the government but governments “just power” derives from the people and is limited and bound in chains by the prohibitions of the Constitution. You find such words in the Constitution as may, may not, shall, and shall not.

By the way the right to “bear” arms is protected in the Bill of rights not “bare arms”.

The government, so long as it behaves lawfully, is not under the “guidance” of the Constitution but it’s “shackles”. Adhering to the Constitution is not an optional exercise. Unfortunately we live in a decadent time wherein vast inroads have been made against our liberty for the benefit a privileged few.

However, it is not my fault you are ignorant of your own Constitution and the founding documents and debates. A good grounding in the Constitution is something all citizens should have and sadly, as you prove, do not. If you disagree with my position then try reading the Constitution yourself. Read the debates surrounding it’s creation. Spend a little time in the company of Thomas Jefferson, james Madison, and George Washington. Your abysmal ignorance of the fundamental precepts underlying our Constitution betray a great depth of shallowness. You would claim to be defending freedom by destroying it.

War is Peace

Ignorance is Strength

As for the doctrine of Judicial Supremacy in interpreting the Constitution. Many legal scholars have commented on the question Judicial Supremacy and there is no support for it in the Constitution. It is the accepted "law of the land" by fiat and tradition only. There is a substantial argument that it violates the separation of powers. Do some reading before you further betray your ignorance.

It is interesting to note that your beloved Fuhrer, like every President before him, took the Presidential Oath. It is the only Oath of office which is dictated in the Constitution.

It reads:

“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."”

You see the truly great men who wrote that testimony to freedom did not regard Presidential obedience and defense of the Constitution as an optional exercise. They did not regard freedom as something to be granted by the King. It is every free Citizen’s Birthright. The Constitution means what it says and says what it means. Attempts to pretend otherwise are simply the arguments of petty tyrants who would have their way rather than be bound by the law. But you see this nation was set up as a nation of laws and not of men. The arbitrary rule of a tyrant was one of the things the founders were setting out to prevent.

The position you take is little different from Hitler’s Brown Shirt Followers. One thing though - when Hitler consolidated his power he had them liquidated. A funny kind of loyalty.

You offer defense and support to those who would subvert this nation to their own petty ends. You are a craven Quisling untrue to his country and it’s tradition of liberty.

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom, it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” - William Pitt (The Younger) 1783

"Every time I write a line,
these people think it's a crime,
to tell 'em wuz on my mind.

I don't gotta say a word,
I just flip 'em the bird,
and keep goin'
I don't take shit from no one."

-Eminem (another great founding father)

If you're such a staunch advocate of "truth, justice and the American way" the why do you persist on betraying your ignorance through blatant lies:

*******************************
I was waiting for a Troll...
by Diogenes • Thursday March 27, 2003 Thut 12:07 PM

...to take the bait Airic. The authorization passed by Congress was:

A. Conditioned on the existence of proof that Iraq took part in the 911 attack. No such proof exists.


please provide justification
by Eric • Thursday March 27, 2003 Thut 12:13 PM

and not opinionated speculation...

A. State your source. Preferably the specific subsections of said resolution in question.

Airic...
by Diogenes • Thursday March 27, 2003 Thut 12:16 PM

A. Do your own fucking homework if you know so much.

That's what I thought
by Eric • Thursday March 27, 2003 Thut 12:21 PM

No matter how you slice it, Diogenes' argument fails to hold water.

*****************************
Don't think we have noticed your silence.

When challenged with backing up your allegations, all we ever seem to get from you is mindless, self-serving blather. Does it make you feel as though your penis is a few inches longer?

How can we ever again put a single stitch of belief in anyting you tell us:

>The authorization passed by Congress was:

>A. Conditioned on the existence of proof that Iraq took part in the 911 attack.


Bullplop. Perhaps YOU need to do some reading next time before YOU betray YOUR ignorance.

http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

idiot.

I read the whole resolution. You're right. It doesn't say that the President was required to provide *any* form of proof whatsoever. It says that the President was authorized to use force if he determined it to be necessary. But it does seem pretty scary that our Congressional representatives would abandon their responsibility to "make war" and vest so much power in one man. It certainly makes one think...

You're absolutely correct. Nowhere in that resolution is the word "proof" (or even one of it's synonyms) mentioned. Idiots like Diogenes would have you believe otherwise, simply because it helps him create some sort of illusory argument that somehow the Constitution is being subverted and that you freedoms are being stolen. As we can see, these 5th Column Leftists will stop at nothing, not even blatant lies, in order to incite revolution in America.

And if you don't agree with them you are labelled a traitor. The Pot to the Kettle: "You're black!!"

Like last night I was corresponding in this thread with some (supposed) LA Lawyer. This liberal claimed that Ron Reagan was one of the worst Presidents on record (but was silent on Clinton). Of course, I disagreed with him.

Someone else piped up with "what about the Iran-Contra scandal?"

Well, what about it? I mean we sold ~2000 arms to Iran. Big deal. We inflated the shit out of their prices and used the deal to negotiate the release of Americans from Lebannon. Iran used the weapons on Iraq. We were killing two birds with one stone.

And then we took the ~$17 M we earned by undermining our Arab enemies and used it to supply guerilla fighters to undermine the Socialist government in Nicaragua. Personally, I hate Socialists. Sounds like everything was all good to me.

If anyone was to blame in the Iran-Contra thing, it was Congress. What idiotic American votes for a law that prevents us from engaged Socialists in a political manner? That's what Congress did (1984?). Reagan, North and the CIA just found the loopholes to make it happen anyway. Seems like those idiotic lawyers would have been able to understand that. That's what they get paid to do...find loopholes...right?

Anyway, sorry for the rant. Rest assured, the American system works and it continues to be the best in the world. Regardless of what these indymedia leftists think.

Thank all you American Patriotic Supporters of my Army of Liberation and the Iraqi peoples.

As soon as the Infidels are defeated I shall severly punish the trators who take food or waters from the infidels. Raping and murdering shall be the order of the day .

Please continue to protest my attempted removal from the high office of Dictator for Life and Supreme Alla of the Iraqi peoples. I am needing as much civil disobedience as you can muster to help turn the peoples of America against the war to remove my powers.

I saddam promise I will not supply and VX, Mustard Gas or Biologicals agents to the slime ball Osama. I may gives them to HAMMAS or some other terrorists but only if theys promises not to use such of these on the American protestors.

Thank You Again my brothers and firm and reverent supporters.
Your Supreme Leader ,
Saddam

Thank-you, all of you nonthinking soldiers of the US military. Thanks for helping me carry out my plan to rape Iraq of its oil reserves. Get ready to attack Venezuela. The CIA just ain't cuttin it with their failed coup attempts.

First of all, the implications pertaining to the "Iran-Contra" affair by Reagan is that he directly superseeded his authority authorized to him to the US constitution.
He lied to congress and lied to the american people.
Reagan supplied arms and training to paramilitary factions of the "Afgan freedom fighters" of the Taliban regime (whats the difference between a "terrorist organization" and a "freedom fighter"?)
Reagan also supplied an illegal war in central america ala Honduras and El Salvador without the approval of Congress.
It could be stated that he supplied "terrorist organizations".

Second of all, Ole' Ronnie Reagan was the main supporter of Saddan Hussein during the Iran Iraq war during the '80s.
He provided the groundroads to the militarization of Iraq, furnishing weapons and weapons programs including (but not limited to) nuclear, chemical and biological strategies and support.

Third point.
"The president is authorized to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq, and (2) enforce all relevant United Nation Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
BUT NOW...THE REST OF THE STORY....

===An FBI official told the New York Times: "We've been looking at this hard for more than a year and you know what, we just don't think it's there."
===. According to a classified British intelligence report seen by BBC News, "There are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network."
===According to Rohan Gunaratna, author of Inside Al Qaeda: Global Network of Terror, "Since U.S. intervention in Afghanistan in October 2001, I have examined several tens of thousands of documents recovered from Al Qaeda and Taliban sources. In addition to listening to 240 tapes taken from Al Qaeda's central registry, I debriefed several Al Qaeda and Taliban detainees. I could find no evidence of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda."

I know you think I'm full of shit, but to tell ya the truth.
I am an infantry veteran of the Panama invasion of 1989
I am also a combat veteran of the Gulf War I.

YOUR GOVERNMENT IS LYING TO YOU!!!!
THEY DO NOT REPRESENT YOU!!
THEY REPRESENT BIG BUSINESS AND CORPORATIONS.

CONGRESS SUPPORTS THE TROOPS THOUGH
On the same day that Congress passed a resolution saying
"Thanks to the troops serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom"
they also passed another resolution
Cutting federal funding to Veterans by 28 Billion dollars over the next several years..
WHY YOU ASK?
To give a 500 Billion dollar tax cut to the upper 1% of the nations wealthy elite.

Fuck off, assclown.

Whats wrong little boy?
The truth hurt too much?
Cant engage the argument?
Only name call?

Obviously I didn't post the above comment telling you to fuck off. That was from our friendly neighborhood villiage idiot.

If in fact you are a vetran, then you've earned the respect of many Americans, including myself. In my opinion, there's not a better way an individual can serve his or her country, and the men and women of our armed forces deserve our respect and thanks.

And as an American, you certainly have a right to your opinion.

However, I have a right to mine as well, as do the rest of the American people.

As I've stated above, Reagan is the 6th highest ranking President of all time. I can counter every argument that you can make against him by simply saying that his actions were entirely patriotic and in serving the best interests of America and the American people. I simply fail to see where any of the accusations you've made against him adversely serve me as an American.

Except of course where you bark about the Constitution being violated. I hear that from liberals and neocons alike, all day long. "They're undermining the Constitution! We're gonna have to take up the guns boys!!"

The truth is that the Constitution is more than just some set of "laws" that are distinguishable and undeniably evident to every individual as being the same, and uniformly interpretable. Humans don't all perceive shades of color with the same hue, the same way Americans don't always agree on what is "Constitutional" and what is not.

The truth is that the Constitution is a gestalt. It's a unifying spirit of the American people. And it's interpreted differently amongst them, which is why we must have a judicial branch to assist interpretation.

Frankly, I don't care what you or anyone else thinks of Reagan. I don't care what you think of Bush, or of Clinton for that matter. I simply brought it up because this forum is packed with liberals and 5th Column leftists that are hell bent on destroying America, and it really gets their goat when I bring up the ridiculous and embarrassing Clinton administration, or give just praise to a great President like Reagan. To me, it's very entertaining to watch these liberals blather on relentlessly and say nothing of significance.

And I alway return the favor.

And by the way, I'm a vetran too. I served for 11 years thoughout the first Gulf war the same as you. And I've seen a lot of soldiers, embittered by their service or personal choices, that they look for a scapegoat to place blame with.

And the Government is the easiest one to find.

But that's just a cop-out.

The truth is that there was a time when you believed so much in this country that you were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for it and for it's government. You put your very life on the line for it. You're a vetran.

But now, embittered and harboring resentment in your heart, you've become a puppet on the strings of the tennis shoes of the 5th Column left. It's not your fault; you're an innocent victim. Their propaganda is fierce. But the reality is what it is.

America is the land of the free and the home of the brave. Has been and always will be. And those statements deeply cut our liberal friends. And that people like me sincerely believe in those "mantras" only serves to grind salt in the wound.

Those soldiers in Iraq serve for the same reasons you and I did.

They believe in freedom.

And I'm not going to piss all over our brothers like you do for the sake of politics. Only a sycophant of the highest order would do such a thing.

It's not about the government or the corporations or who controls what when where and how.

It's about the spirit of freedom. Yours, mine and theirs. Our friends and neighbors. And even the freedom of the Iraqi people.

I love my country because I love freedom. Sure, it's government has problems. I haven't seen a government yet that didn't. In fact, I haven't seen a government yet that I'd rather live under. Feel free to tell me of all the governments that better serve the people of their nations and the people of the world than ours. I'll eagerly await your response to that.

Would you like me to help you back into your straightjacket now? I bought a copy of "Politics for Dummies" for you to read to pass the time. Hopefully, we'll soon be able to make some progress on that multiple personality disorder of yours.

taking anonymous shots at their obvious intellectual (and quite possibly, physical) superiors, by way of this forum. The anonymity of the internet is such a wonderful thing. How splendid it must be for these people, those who were beaten every day at recess by the school bully, to have a place where they can throw stones at their perceived enemies. Technology has come a long way from the days of catching a good old fashioned passionate ass-whoopping on the play ground and having your lunch monies stolen!

To be able to mock those that are his obvious superordinates, and be able to claim plausible deniabilty as he changes his moniker as frequently as he changes the air in his lungs!

How brave!

I wouldn't know intellect if it bit me on my flabby, pock-marked ass.

Isn't it cute?? And it loves talking about asses?

It's time for your shot of thorazine. If you get any worse, I might have to recommend a lobotomy.

You can always recognize the insane by the way they deny their own dementia and hallmark those around them with it out of paranoia...

I can always recognize the insane by looking in a mirror.

I just can't resist. Let's just see how long it wants to play...

to hold the opinions of the minority and feel compelled to drive the trolls out of your home by any means necessary! You must be a very busy person!

Eric, are you having fun talking to yourself yet?

There are plenty of us here that are listening.

Are you, like Eric, demented as well?

Par for the course around here. The status quo. We should fit right in!

Oh, so you ARE a conservative! You'll fit right in at the mental ward, as all of the patients are rightwingers.

but none with any courage!

Oh, no. It takes ALOT of courage to back our troops and then vote to cut the VA budget by $25 BILLION dollars! Please, try not to make people so sick when posting here.

I paid significantly less tax this year and I'll pay even less next year.

Get a fucking job and pay your fucking doctor bills like the rest of us. Just because you served don't mean shit to me. Quit whining you disabled piece of shit. Roll your fucking wheelchair down to the SSI office and collect your fucking food stamps.

Just quit whining.

Way to go, !!@@#@$^&**&(. Whenever we conservatives want to show how pathetic we are, we can always resort to juvenile name-calling. Great job!

that brain must be getting tired. wuz-a-matta?? sumbuwdy needs a nap.

WELL, ERIC
You've failed to address any of my allegations from the previous post.
Also.........
Any political science professor will tell you that POLLS are usually bullshit and slanted towards any viewpoint that assembles the information.
YOUR STATEMENT"I simply fail to see where any of the accusations you've made against him adversely serve me as an American"
First of all Eric, I know you've never served in combat from your assinine loyalty to the Presidents that go around creating terror in the world and absolutly nothing changes.
How did Ronnie change the world for the better?
(please dont show your ignorance and try to substantiate how the reagan administration was responsible for the collapse of the former soviet union)
ALL he did was kill a shitload of people and a shitload of americans that where brainwashed into thinking that they were doing the right thing.
He also misappropriated government funds that were paid for by taxpayers.
Your comments relating to the Constitution was quite and eye opener.
Do you realize that the Constitution is a "social contract" with the people living here?
Do you know what the "consent of the governed" means?
Have you ever read the declaration of independence?
The basic interpretation for the constitution can be found by reading "The Federalist Papers".
You know what makes me laugh, there eric
When people claim to be a "veteran" (11 years) and throught thier comment spell it "vetran"
Feel free to list all your units, and dates served, and countries you served in.

I have lived for extended periods of time in central america, europe and the middle east.
There are many, many different places where a person could live and be free of governmental heirachys. (as you will repy, go live there then).
But alas, my conservative sellout.
My forefathers and countrymen have fought and died to secure freedom and liberty for me today.
I am not about to "roll over" and let some global corporate fascists take the country I love, and have fought for , and turn it into some police state.
I will not let them die in vain.
America is about freedom loving people that challenge the government about its beliefs,
without fear of political reprecussions.
Thats what makes it america eric.

As for my brothers that have to kill others overseas for corporate interests...
Most people in the military are 18-24
Not much time to develop a true picture of how the world really operates.
Do you ever see shots fired on those army commericals?
What about pictures of bullet-ridden bodies?
All the training in the world wont ready a person to view the absolute chaos
and devastation of combat.
It will never be able to define the feeling of a fellow soldier shot in the stomach screaming that he dosent want to die over here (in some foriegn country).
Never be able to explain why the hardest combat soldiers break down into tears at the sight of wandering children looking for thier parents, or a lone child crying next to his dead parents.
I care so much about the troops, that i will protest at all times against this illegal war.
I care enough to try to get them home before they have to see things that will leave an impression on them forever.
So feel free to write back (of course with your military units),
or if i've failed to properly address any issues.
as I am always here in the backshadows.
Always watching for traitors of the constitution and of freedom.
your truly.
a "vet(e)ran"

You always know when you're winning an argument on IMC, because your opponent feels the need to attack your spelling or grammar, and not the meat of your post.

I was unaware that my spelling was being graded. Pardon my carelessness. But while we're on the subject systemfailure, allow me to re-post every single spelling or grammatical mistake you made in your last comments:

assinine
absolutly
dont (missing apostrophe)
reagan (capitalize proper noun names)
americans (capitalize, and you call yourself an American!)
shitload (hyphenate)
eric (seems you have a problem capitalizing proper noun names)
throught
thier
europe (again)
heirachys
repy
reprecussions
Thats (problem with apostrophes too)
Commericals
foriegn
i (capitalize the pronoun "I")

Of course you made most of these errors numerous times. Not to mention the ridiculous number of subject-verb disagreements, sentence fragments and other grammatical errors you made. I found it patently absurd that someone that is obviously a buffoon would found his argument around the lunacy that he is a linguistic scientist. Next time don't leave yourself so wide open.

Now on to the meat:

"You've failed to address any of my allegations from the previous post. "

Why should I waste my time on a buffoon?

"Any political science professor will tell you that POLLS are usually bullshit and slanted towards any viewpoint that assembles the information. "

Nice disclaimer. Buffoon.


"First of all Eric, I know you've never served in combat from your assinine loyalty to the Presidents that go around creating terror in the world and absolutly nothing changes. "

There are many, many more like me.

"How did Ronnie change the world for the better? "

You didn't even read my post, did you. What do I care? He's a Republican. That's all that matters. He didn't spend his days re-defining "sexual relations". That makes him okay in my book.

"ALL he did was kill a shitload of people and a shitload of americans that where brainwashed into thinking that they were doing the right thing."

You're pretty bitter, aren't you? Want to tell me what happened? Did you loose you legs in battle Lt. Dan? (since you're probably too stupid to know why I called you Lt. Dan, I'll tell you. Lt. Dan is character from the movie "Forrest Gump")

"He also misappropriated government funds that were paid for by taxpayers. "
State your source.

"Do you realize that the Constitution is a "social contract" with the people living here? "

So.

"Do you know what the "consent of the governed" means? "

Yes. I'm governed and I consent. So do most of the rest of us. If you don't consent then you're in the minority. Stop paying taxes. Or better yet, leave.

"Have you ever read the declaration of independence? "

Yep.

"The basic interpretation for the constitution can be found by reading "The Federalist Papers". "

Thanks for the info. I bet your good at Trivial Pursuit, huh?

"You know what makes me laugh, there eric "

People who don't know when to use capital letters?? No, probably not it. But I suppose you're about to tell me.

"When people claim to be a "veteran" (11 years) and throught thier comment spell it "vetran" "

Oh. There it is. The infamous attack on my spelling. Good job.

"Feel free to list all your units, and dates served, and countries you served in. "

Yeah. Right. After you there big man. Start with your name, rank, and SSN. Home address and credit card number. Expiration date.

HAR!

List my units.

You hollywood, false front, back lot, B-movie, video game, thunderous bar chord signifying nothing liberal piece of socialist shit.

"I have lived for extended periods of time in central america, europe and the middle east."

No shit? Big whoop. I've been to every Continent on this planet, including Antarctica. I just got back from a two-month stint in Lahore, Pakistan, El Salvador and Honduras. If anything, your world travels should make you appreciate the fact that there's no place like home.

I guess you just can't get that through your puny little brain.

No wonder you can't spell.

Maybe you should go back to the country you liked best.

Buffoon.

"There are many, many different places where a person could live and be free of governmental heirachys. (as you will repy, go live there then)."

Read my mind. But didn't explain why you don't. Typical liberal.

"But alas, my conservative sellout."
(Sentence fragment. Can you put a subject AND a verb in at least one sentence there Mr. Grammar major?)

"My forefathers and countrymen have fought and died to secure freedom and liberty for me today. "

So did mine. I refuse to piss on them like you.

"I am not about to "roll over" and let some global corporate fascists take the country I love, and have fought for , and turn it into some police state. "

I would bet a steak dinner that you've never served a day in the military in your life. If you can prove it, I'll gladly pay up. You're just a pathetic liberal that couldn't debate his way out of an Iraqi prison. If we had an idiot like you in our unit, I doubt he would have made it back alive. Quit impersonating a "veteran" you schismatic schnook.


"I will not let them die in vain. "

I suppose you'll just hang out on the internet and "argue" until everyone sees things your way. Good luck there General Custer.

"America is about freedom loving people that challenge the government about its beliefs,
without fear of political reprecussions. "

What sort of repercussions are you afraid of? I mean, a big warrior-man such as yourself? Afraid of just looking like an idiot?

You should be.

"Thats what makes it america eric. "

Well God bless it. America: "Where idiots can speak freely, without fear of reprecussions (sic).

"As for my brothers that have to kill others overseas for corporate interests... "

*continues to urinate on the troops*

"Most people in the military are 18-24 Not much time to develop a true picture of how the world really operates. "

Yeah, they're all stupid. Not nearly as intelligent as you.

"Do you ever see shots fired on those army commericals? What about pictures of bullet-ridden bodies?"

Commercial are skewed and slanted. Think I remember some other genius using that argument recently. Oh yeah, that was you.

Quit watching so much TV. It's much better to hang out arguing on the internet all day.

"All the training in the world wont ready a person to view the absolute chaos and devastation of combat. "

Gee thanks Lt. Dan for that insightful info. BTW, "won't" has an apostrophe too.

"It will never be able to define the feeling of a fellow soldier shot in the stomach screaming that he dosent want to die over here (in some foriegn country). "

So does "doesn't".

You act like you know something about death and battle. Why don't you quit all of you babbling and convince us that you aren't just a faker. Spend a little bit of that energy and type up your story. Do something useful.

Because frankly, you haven't said shit. Nadda. Zilch. Zippo.

Tell us your story. Or shut the fuck up already.

"Never be able to explain why the hardest combat soldiers break down into tears at the sight of wandering children looking for thier parents, or a lone child crying next to his dead parents."

Blah, blah blah rant babble grunt piss whine moan blah blah. You are fucking boring me to tears.

"I care so much about the troops, that i will protest at all times against this illegal war. "

The troops don't want or need the help of some idiotic liberal with a "Walter Mitty" syndrome. The need our support.

And this war is VERY legal.

"I care enough to try to get them home before they have to see things that will leave an impression on them forever."

Again, what would you know besides renting old war movies down at Blockbusters?

So feel free to write back (of course with your military units),"

Like I said pisant. After you.

"or if i've failed to properly address any issues. "

How about just failing to address and issues, period.

"as I am always here in the backshadows. "

Oooooooooooo. Spooky.

Idiot.

"Always watching for traitors of the constitution and of freedom."

Boo hoo hoo. Indymedia liberals think me a traitor. Oh boo hoo hoo.

A traitor to whom? You? What a laugh. If anyone are the traitors, it's you liberals. Treason of the highest order.

"your truly."

A vetran.


P.S. If you can't inject some truth and meaning into your next post, I won't bother responding. I have more important idiots to waste my time on.

wow
no
you don't.

once again, a failure to address any points of the previous argument.
Yes, I have served in combat.
I served as an infantryman in
Operation Just Cause in Panama in 1989
i served in the 4th battalion 6th infantry regt, 5th Infantry Division
I also served in the 3rd Squadron/ 2nd Armored cavalry regt in the gulf war 1
I received the combat infantry badge and numerous awards and citations.
Waiting for your reply prof. Forrest,
PS your very good at proofreading, but thats about it.
Try engaging the real argument next time instead of a "straw man".
I'd like to eat at Stuart Andersons,
thank you.
still waiting to hear your combat units
fucking traitor

Still playing dungions and dragons?
Not a valid link, just sucker bait.

Will somebody please help me get laid? I guess women aren't into fascists.

Listing a bunch of non-confirmable military units is not proof of squat. Any thirteen-year-old internet savvy punk can do that. If you want that steak dinner, you’re going to have to do better than that.

But since you did at least try, I’ll tell you what I can of mine.

I wasn’t exactly in a “unit”. We don’t call them units in the Navy that much anymore. We call them “Teams”. Specifically, I was a UDT member of Navy SEAL Team 2 for nearly six years throughout the first Gulf War. For the last four I was attached to NAVSPECWARCOM (Navy Special Warfare Command) in California.

While I certainly could, I’m not going to sit here and gloat about how pathetic your political resume really sounds. I’m not one to piss all over a brother like that. And since many of the operations I was involved in are still classified today, I certainly won’t bother listing them on the internet. I’ll just tell you that I’ve been involved in many different facets of tactical combat and served my country in many different ways.

And I’m not one some swaggering idiot that feels the need to brag about it. You asked, so there you go. If you want to know more, then let’s go have a beer someplace and discuss it.

"i served in the 4th battalion 6th infantry regt, 5th Infantry Division"


Which Company? Who was your OIC? I knew a Lt. Col. Adam Lamkin who was OIC for an anti-tank company during "Just Cause".

I served as a male prostitute for the 7th Calvary.

Spammer is Wow. Spammer is Lynx-11. Spammer is Anonymous Volunteer.

I like gibberish.

THANKS for not addressing any of the points (once again) of the previous argument.
Still waiting for your reply. and a list of your combat units.

Eat shit and die you fucking pogue Navy seal eh? "classified eh? (thats why you spelled veteran, "vetran")
name the time and the place you want to buy me a steak dinner you lying ass poser.

ps
ive already hAcKeD your ass for writing that "Diogenes" Post earlier, so I'll have all your information on you shortly.

signed,
a real vet(e)ran

Which Company? Who was your OIC? I knew a Lt. Col. Adam Lamkin who was OIC for an anti-tank company during "Just Cause".
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
LETS SEE NOW.....
You claim to be "Mr vetran SpecOps" and you've been everywhere== and your lack of knowledge of military units is stunning.
Did you know that the highest ranking officer in a anti-tank company is a Captain......

Did you know that the rank of Lt Colonel is reserved for the commanding officer that is in charge of a battallion.....
(that would be 4 companies and 1 HHC company.)

You are as the french would say.
"Es-tup-id-iot"
ps
It is better to be thought a fool...
Than to open your mouth and prove it....

Yes, I knew those things. I also didn't say that I knew Mr. Lamkin WHILE he was associated with YOUR unit.

As a matter of fact, I met him several years AFTER operation "Just Cause".

And guess what, shitbird? I still know him today.

After our little discussion yesterday, I gave him a ring last night. To make a long story short, check this out:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/8149/panama.html

scroll all the way down to the last name on that list.



COMPANY E (Rear Detachment) (Antitank Company using M901 ITVs)

OIC

CPT Stephen A. Lamkin



Now my only question is, which one of those names is YOURS?

Let's see. You also said that you "served in the 3rd Squadron/ 2nd Armored cavalry regt in the gulf war 1."

I wonder if I knew anyone in the 2nd....hmmm. I could probably get a list of names to cross reference...but why bother. You're full of bullshit.

"ive already hAcKeD your ass for writing that "Diogenes" Post earlier, so I'll have all your information on you shortly."

I'll tell you what Mr. Super Hacker stud, if you can get my info before I have yours, we'll make it two steak dinners.

"It is better to be thought a fool...
Than to open your mouth and prove it.... "


I couldn't agree more.

THanks for (once again) not answering the points of the argument from the previous posts.
Seems like all your good at is Ad Hominem style arguments, and not the real issues.

Who I am is virtually unimportant, we are here to debate the issues at hand.
I am not too difficult to find, if you look just below the surface...So come and get me.

I know what i have done , and where i have been, and why I come here everyday to teach supposed
"patriots" what the constitution really means and what peace ,freedom ,and liberty stands for.
I have seen the realities of war, and I will never stop telling people the horrors and disgust of humans acting like barbaric unthinking animals.
But it seems that you were too busy watching "seal training" on discovery channel getting your bogus information, than addressing the real issues.
Let me guess, you were a member of BUDS class 234.
?.
signed
a real vet(e)ran
ps
yes i already got your info+*SySTem^^FaiLUre)(@)
thats two dinners you owe me........................

Good guess! You really are a hacker huh? Well, looks like I owe you those steak dinners! I'm utterly amazed at your abilities!! I guess you own me now. I'll just sit here and wait for the knock at the door.

While I'm waiting, could you please tell me again, exactly which points of the argument that I keep failing to address? I'm sort of thick. Sometimes things have to be spelled out for me. Someone of your obvious intellectual superiority must bare in mind that he will have to be patient with someone as slow as myself.

I dont think i will knock on your door, eric.
I dont wish anything bad for you for expressing your first amendment rights.
I commend you on your service to your country, but remember that america means "we the people"and not the goverment.
I wanted you to address the
"america is about the people, not blind patriotism" post from earlier.(see above)

This forum is designed to give all americans a voice to express thier viewpoints about this
stupid war. Both Pro and Con.
My experiences in combat must have greatly differed from what you have seen, because it made me sick. I did not enjoy "doing it".---though i was good at it.
I learned that there is always a better resort to arguments than mindless violence.
I served my country to build a better tomorrow for our children, for them to be able to live in a society that is truly free, and a model of democracy to all other countries of the world.
This is not what it has become. I found I was lied to.
These are not the ideals that i fought for.
I was once like you, and believed the government because i thought they had my best interests in mind. But the more i read and the more i learned, my viewpoints changed drastically and my past experiences made more sense once i discovered the new ( and disturbing) possibilities.
I stand behind the constitution, and behind the bill of rights.
Enough now with the diplomacies
answer the fucking post..............

thought i d expose you ha ha ha

It's good for the soul.