|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#1052
|
|||
|
|||
Mark Hickey wrote in message . ..
I think your statement that Ashcroft is just waiting to make discussing politics on a bicycling newsgroup a "terrorist offense" is so over the top that the "tin foil hat" was somewhat reserved in comparison. A little follow-up on your remark: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11054&c=130 Basically, we are putting our civil liberties in the hands of Bush and Ashcroft when everything we know about them indicates that their views of civil liberties in this country are at odds with what most Americans think they should be. I think the odds are actually pretty good that posting an anti-administration rant on this ng could help to get you flagged. Go to an anti-war protest, write a letter or two to the editor; next thing you know you're on the no-fly list. Could it really happen? Do you want to leave it up to Ashcroft? JP |
#1053
|
|||
|
|||
Mark Hickey wrote in message . ..
I think your statement that Ashcroft is just waiting to make discussing politics on a bicycling newsgroup a "terrorist offense" is so over the top that the "tin foil hat" was somewhat reserved in comparison. A little follow-up on your remark: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11054&c=130 Basically, we are putting our civil liberties in the hands of Bush and Ashcroft when everything we know about them indicates that their views of civil liberties in this country are at odds with what most Americans think they should be. I think the odds are actually pretty good that posting an anti-administration rant on this ng could help to get you flagged. Go to an anti-war protest, write a letter or two to the editor; next thing you know you're on the no-fly list. Could it really happen? Do you want to leave it up to Ashcroft? JP |
#1054
|
|||
|
|||
Java Man wrote:
FWIW, I don't think Presidents should be chosen on the basis of their ability to handle hecklers. But a few video clips of a candidate looking bad in the face of heckling could make the difference in a close election. Fair enough GWB's handlers have it right because he's more vulnerable to hecklers than Kerry is. W is likely to come off as being either nasty or dumb when heckled because he's inarticulate and apparently somewhat belligerent when crossed. But thats a good reason to doubt his abilities as leader of your country -- Andy Morris AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK Love this: Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ |
#1055
|
|||
|
|||
Java Man wrote:
FWIW, I don't think Presidents should be chosen on the basis of their ability to handle hecklers. But a few video clips of a candidate looking bad in the face of heckling could make the difference in a close election. Fair enough GWB's handlers have it right because he's more vulnerable to hecklers than Kerry is. W is likely to come off as being either nasty or dumb when heckled because he's inarticulate and apparently somewhat belligerent when crossed. But thats a good reason to doubt his abilities as leader of your country -- Andy Morris AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK Love this: Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ |
#1056
|
|||
|
|||
(JP) wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote in message . .. I think your statement that Ashcroft is just waiting to make discussing politics on a bicycling newsgroup a "terrorist offense" is so over the top that the "tin foil hat" was somewhat reserved in comparison. A little follow-up on your remark: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11054&c=130 Basically, we are putting our civil liberties in the hands of Bush and Ashcroft when everything we know about them indicates that their views of civil liberties in this country are at odds with what most Americans think they should be. Actually, you're absolutely wrong there. Most Americans support the Patriot act, and don't want the government to be hamstrung by nonsensical restrictions (such as the ones that existed before the PA that prohibited law enforcement and intelligence agencies from sharing information). I think the odds are actually pretty good that posting an anti-administration rant on this ng could help to get you flagged. Go to an anti-war protest, write a letter or two to the editor; next thing you know you're on the no-fly list. Could it really happen? Do you want to leave it up to Ashcroft? I think you're joining Jobst in the paranoia department. There aren't enough agents in the world to keep up with these kind of discussions - face it, we're just not important enough to bother with. ;-) Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame |
#1057
|
|||
|
|||
(JP) wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote in message . .. I think your statement that Ashcroft is just waiting to make discussing politics on a bicycling newsgroup a "terrorist offense" is so over the top that the "tin foil hat" was somewhat reserved in comparison. A little follow-up on your remark: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11054&c=130 Basically, we are putting our civil liberties in the hands of Bush and Ashcroft when everything we know about them indicates that their views of civil liberties in this country are at odds with what most Americans think they should be. Actually, you're absolutely wrong there. Most Americans support the Patriot act, and don't want the government to be hamstrung by nonsensical restrictions (such as the ones that existed before the PA that prohibited law enforcement and intelligence agencies from sharing information). I think the odds are actually pretty good that posting an anti-administration rant on this ng could help to get you flagged. Go to an anti-war protest, write a letter or two to the editor; next thing you know you're on the no-fly list. Could it really happen? Do you want to leave it up to Ashcroft? I think you're joining Jobst in the paranoia department. There aren't enough agents in the world to keep up with these kind of discussions - face it, we're just not important enough to bother with. ;-) Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame |
#1058
|
|||
|
|||
On 12 Oct 2004 13:16:40 -0700, (JP) wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote in message . .. I think your statement that Ashcroft is just waiting to make discussing politics on a bicycling newsgroup a "terrorist offense" is so over the top that the "tin foil hat" was somewhat reserved in comparison. A little follow-up on your remark: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11054&c=130 Basically, we are putting our civil liberties in the hands of Bush and Ashcroft when everything we know about them indicates that their views of civil liberties in this country are at odds with what most Americans think they should be. I think the odds are actually pretty good that posting an anti-administration rant on this ng could help to get you flagged. Go to an anti-war protest, write a letter or two to the editor; next thing you know you're on the no-fly list. Could it really happen? Do you want to leave it up to Ashcroft? Could it? There are some people I don't want on the plane. Ron |
#1059
|
|||
|
|||
On 12 Oct 2004 13:16:40 -0700, (JP) wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote in message . .. I think your statement that Ashcroft is just waiting to make discussing politics on a bicycling newsgroup a "terrorist offense" is so over the top that the "tin foil hat" was somewhat reserved in comparison. A little follow-up on your remark: http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11054&c=130 Basically, we are putting our civil liberties in the hands of Bush and Ashcroft when everything we know about them indicates that their views of civil liberties in this country are at odds with what most Americans think they should be. I think the odds are actually pretty good that posting an anti-administration rant on this ng could help to get you flagged. Go to an anti-war protest, write a letter or two to the editor; next thing you know you're on the no-fly list. Could it really happen? Do you want to leave it up to Ashcroft? Could it? There are some people I don't want on the plane. Ron |
#1060
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 21:17:42 -0500, "B.B."
u wrote: In article , Ronsonic wrote: On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:32:24 -0500, Todd Kuzma wrote: Ronsonic wrote: On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 15:18:19 -0500, Todd Kuzma wrote: C'mon, Bush-supporters. Let's hear your justification for using the Secret Service to arrest people who dare to voice an opinion contrary to the President's. You'll get arrested for trespassing at a Kerry event as well. Don't try to claim that the right to free speech is the right to crash a party or the right to disrupt someone else's event. This isn't "tresspassing" or "disrupting an event." Going where you ain't welcome is trespassing. The president is supposed to represent everybody--even his opponents. Yep. But on the job, not at home and not at a campaign event. Ron |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|