nvxplorer said:It's possible that Canada possesses the world's largest oil reserves in its shale fields. What does Satan have in store for Canadians? Since oil is Satan's handiwork, are we sinning by driving our cars?
Tar sands. My mistake.CCGirl said:In Canada, the Tar Sands (shale fields?) are considered a "Gift from God"!!At least most Albertans believe so!
clirus said:I believe Satan has provided the oil wealth to make it possible for Islam to thrive.
clirus said:I have always thought any form of wealth was a "test" not a "gift" from God.
Is poverty a test as well? What, in your opinion, would not be a test from God?clirus said:I have always thought any form of wealth was a "test" not a "gift" from God.
Not charging them does not prove that the Times did not violate the law, it merely reaffirms America's longstanding softness towards traitors.OhhJim said:Why on earth wouldn't the administration bring charges against the NYT, if they could make their case?
In other words, if the administration doesn't bring charges against the Times, it is an admission that they realize the Times didn't violate any laws.
Fish or cut bait. No more whining, let's see some action.
MachZer0 said:Not charging them does not prove that the Times did not violate the law, it merely reaffirms America's longstanding softness towards traitors.
How on earth was it treason?MachZer0 said:Not charging them does not prove that the Times did not violate the law, it merely reaffirms America's longstanding softness towards traitors.
Providing classified information to the enemy during a time of war. Is that so hard to figure out?faith guardian said:How on earth was it treason?
Yes, all positive repercussuions too. such as, insiders might stop leaking classified information to the press which in turn might stop priniting it in the interest of national security.If they had prosecuted the NYT for treason - good grief it would have had repercussions.
Give us a break. the freedom of speech and of the press are not limitless. Liberals have proven that to us over and over againAs far as I go, it would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the USA is no longer a free country, and that freedom of speech is not something the US citizens and news have.
Using the same logic that has been used to prove that the NY Times did nothing illegal (they were not charged with a crime which to some means they were acting legally), nobody in the administration has been charged with anything, so they obviously haven't broken the law (except for the bizarre charge against Libby)What Bush did, monitoring people that way - was of a very dubious nature. And the fact that his administration DID was a fact that once ANYONE knew it, it should have gone out in the news immediately, and IMHO it should be yet another reason to get Bush out of the seat he is in.
This monitoring may not be bad in itself. But once it is in place, it is very tempting to use it for other means than protecting against terrorism. The knowledge they get could be used to thwart all kinds of things. And not just bad things.
It, like the CIA atrocities should be publicly known, and the officials responsible should be held responsible.
Is this what they call a strawman argument? Republicans have not faired well in the courts? Didn't Bush win the 2000 election with the help of the greatest court in the land?clirus said:A very good statement. As a matter of principal, I would like to see a prosecution.
However, as a matter of reality, I doubt I would even bother. Christians, conservatives and Republicans have not faired well in the courts. The Bible says Christians should resolve differences without going to court.
MachZer0 said:In this regard yes, as have all administrations for many years
(by the way, it's your administration too, like it or not)
clirus said:A very good statement. As a matter of principal, I would like to see a prosecution.
However, as a matter of reality, I doubt I would even bother. Christians, conservatives and Republicans have not faired well in the courts. The Bible says Christians should resolve differences without going to court.
Even lawyers will tell you that the courts come out with some weird rulings. I believe this is because they are a secular body. An example of this is the ruling that the president did not have authority to establish military tribunals.They said congress did have the authority, so that will probably be another opportunity for Republicans to prove democrats hate America (if Republican are in power).
I considered this to be a trivial ruling, and several justices pointed out that this was just another impediment to the president providing security for Americans.
I particularly disliked the mention of the Geneva Convention. If there was ever a document that was stupid, the Geneva Convention would have to be that document. If the document had any validity or power it would have been used to eliminate the entire Islamic religion for supporting "martyrs that murder". The only use of the Geneva Convention has been to cripple the ability to wage war.
Atrocities are a part of war, not an acceptable part of war, but certainly not something to be used as a political weapon. Every war ever waged has had civilian deaths, rapes, murders, coverups, etc. The only reason they were not reported in WW II was that there was total censorship.
A special set of law called the Uniform Code of Military Justice exists in parallel to Civil Law to handle the special situation of war.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice does not give the Atheistic liberal news media and democrats a way to use the Iraq war as a political weapon so they use the Geneva Convention as a bases of how a war should be fought.
If anyone wants to state that America should never enter into any war, I will buy that. War is ugly and should never be entered into lightly but once entered into, it must be carried to completion.
Probably better to let the NYT Treason be tried in the court of public opinion than a courtroom.
What would be interesting would be a reading in congress of a list of mistakes and misrepresentation of the news media for the previous day. However, that would probably leave no time for other business. Whoa, that could be a good thing too (no time for other business).
clirus said:1) Where was the media when there needed to be an investigation into the Pearl Harbor situation.
2) America should never enter into another war without there being a Declaration of War
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?