Ashcroft wants Patriot Act widened

http://www.msnbc.com/news/922454.asp?vts=060520031620

Like I warned before and I'll say again, Bush and his buddies will turn the U.S. into one big police state. They're on the march, and have I not stated before they'll trot out anything to justify such acts? See Ashcroft do the very thing I have stated. Yes, they will justify anything for security.

This is getting a bit scary..... Ashcroft is following in on McCarthy's footsteps....

I can see it now HEADLINE: BILL OF RIGHTS DEMINISHED TO NOTHING; MARTIAL LAW INSTITUTED.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by ILike2DriveCars
I can see it now HEADLINE: BILL OF RIGHTS DEMINISHED TO NOTHING; MARTIAL LAW INSTITUTED.:rolleyes:

:eek2:

Makes you wonder what ever happened to the 'Land of the free' :o

Originally posted by freakray
Makes you wonder what ever happened to the 'Land of the free' :o

The what?

Pssst, come to NZ

Yogs, Pick -

do even you guys agree with this?

Originally posted by Toksin



Pssst, come to NZ

Oh trust me, Ive actually been planning to. New Zealand or Australia, one of the two.

Originally posted by Toksin



Pssst, come to NZ

Still got that spare room we spoke about Dave? ;)

But the law is there to protect you.....you have nothing to fear if you are a law-abiding citizen........right? Just keep one eye on the goalposts,because they are shifting all the time.I can't help wondering how long it will be before publishing 'unpatriotic' material will be officially frowned upon.It would help perhaps if people discarded the notion that terrorists are all AK-47 waving arabs on suicide missions....would the Oklahoma City bombing have been prevented by the Patriot act?I don't think so.Unless you cannot define what you are looking for,any law to allow you to go looking will always erode the rights to privacy of an unacceptably high number of decent and honest citizens.Sadly,this kind of law provides a window of opportunity for all manner of government agencies to rifle through your personal life using the pretext of 'patriotism and security' when their true purpose may be something less than legitimate.

Originally posted by taranaki
But the law is there to protect you.....you have nothing to fear if you are a law-abiding citizen........right? Just keep one eye on the goalposts,because they are shifting all the time.I can't help wondering how long it will be before publishing 'unpatriotic' material will be officially frowned upon.It would help perhaps if people discarded the notion that terrorists are all AK-47 waving arabs on suicide missions....would the Oklahoma City bombing have been prevented by the Patriot act?I don't think so.Unless you cannot define what you are looking for,any law to allow you to go looking will always erode the rights to privacy of an unacceptably high number of decent and honest citizens.Sadly,this kind of law provides a window of opportunity for all manner of government agencies to rifle through your personal life using the pretext of 'patriotism and security' when their true purpose may be something less than legitimate.

I can imagine that this new law would entail assuming everyone guilty until proven innocent though, giving them the excuse to do what they want.
I can also imagine that foreign residents of the USA will get the extra little bit of scrutineering on the premise of 'potential terrorist'.

I know I may be blowing things out a little, but I am just laying out a few random thoughts I would like to hear other people's thoughts on.

Originally posted by igor@af
Yogs, Pick -

do even you guys agree with this?

Here's my response:
WASHINGTON, June 5 — Attorney General John Ashcroft urged Congress on Thursday to expand the USA Patriot Act to permit the government to hold more suspects indefinitely and to extend the death penalty to more people accused of terrorist crimes. He also said the law, which critics say is eroding citizens’ legitimate rights, needs to be expanded to allow charges against anyone who helps or works with suspected terrorist groups as “material supporters.”

How is this eroding citizen's legitimate rights? They are talking about detaining foreign terrorists! And anyone who helps or funds a terrorist group is guilty of treason, so the "expansion" that was mentioned in this article is the same as the laws we have now, with more emphasis. Terrorist supporters deserve to die a traitor's death.

Originally posted by taranaki
Sadly,this kind of law provides a window of opportunity for all manner of government agencies to rifle through your personal life using the pretext of 'patriotism and security' when their true purpose may be something less than legitimate.

Something less legitimate such as?

Originally posted by Milliardo
http://www.msnbc.com/news/922454.asp?vts=060520031620

Like I warned before and I'll say again, Bush and his buddies will turn the U.S. into one big police state. They're on the march, and have I not stated before they'll trot out anything to justify such acts? See Ashcroft do the very thing I have stated. Yes, they will justify anything for security.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Yes, that damn Bush its trotting out MY citizen's rights!:rolleyes:


But not anymore than the left, who wants my free speach, right to defend myelf, and the right to my property.

Originally posted by igor@af
Yogs, Pick -

do even you guys agree with this?

Which part? The one that says he wants to expand the act? Then yes, its clear he does.

Do I agree that the US is turning into a police state? That will only happen when the government comes and takes the guns away.

Do I agree that my rights have been eroded? When the AFLCIO is declared illegal I’ll believe that. The tax system here erodes more the Patriot Act ever could.

Do I agree in expanding the death penalty? Yes!

Do I agree that Milardo's assessments have no merit? Considering his track record of being wrong every assessment he’s made then, yes, I agree to that too.

Do I agree that the government bears watching and dissent is welcome? Then I agree to that too.

Do I agree that some of you guys are "Chicken Littles"? Then I agree to that too.


What I don’t agree with is comparing Ashcroft to McCarthy. I would also remind people that standing in front of congress spouting your views does not mean that something will become laws. I will also remind you that Chicken Little’s crying about the sky falling is getting quite tiresome.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Originally posted by YogsVR4


Which part? The one that says he wants to expand the act? Then yes, its clear he does.

Do I agree that the US is turning into a police state? That will only happen when the government comes and takes the guns away.

Do I agree that my rights have been eroded? When the AFLCIO is declared illegal I’ll believe that. The tax system here erodes more the Patriot Act ever could.

Do I agree in expanding the death penalty? Yes!

Do I agree that Milardo's assessments have no merit? Considering his track record of being wrong every assessment he’s made then, yes, I agree to that too.

Do I agree that the government bears watching and dissent is welcome? Then I agree to that too.

Do I agree that some of you guys are "Chicken Littles"? Then I agree to that too.


What I don’t agree with is comparing Ashcroft to McCarthy. I would also remind people that standing in front of congress spouting your views does not mean that something will become laws. I will also remind you that Chicken Little’s crying about the sky falling is getting quite tiresome.

OH NO HE DIDN'T!!!!!!!:D :D
http://smiles.sprintmax.com/+1.gif

Yogs,

do you know the definition outlined for a "terrorist" in the USA Patriot Act?

Let me enlighten you -

"any person who commits an act which endangers human life and is a violation of State or Federal law"

I know you are a very smart person so I will not go into explaining what this means, as you can surely figure out for yourself.

This isn't fighting terrorism. This is bullshit. Ashcroft has setup a nice base for himself, where he can name anyone a "terrorist."
Now, he is trying to expand some provisions to give him more power to fight these 'terrorists,' but since the definition for a 'terrorist' is so broad, he can fight not only terrorists but jaywalkers and those who use cell phones while driving in NYC.

Why would the definition have to be so broad?

Originally posted by igor@af

Why would the definition have to be so broad?

The only thing that comes to mind is so that he can do whatever he wants and yet never actually be acting 'outside the law'

Just my penny's worth......

Originally posted by igor@af
Yogs,


"any person who commits an act which endangers human life and is a violation of State or Federal law"



I'd like to see the full explanation of this...........:rolleyes: Please show me where you got that.

Originally posted by freakray




Just my penny's worth......

Keep the change.

He is not acting illegally and you guys are making it sound a lot worse than it really is and even fabricating what really is happening. Do you think, of all groups, conservatives would push for privacy-invasion ans the taking-away of the rights of the people? If you do, you are just plain ignorant, and can't see through your foggy brain to what this act is really doing.

Originally posted by Pick


I'd like to see the full explanation of this...........:rolleyes: Please show me where you got that.

You must think you're so smart....:rolleyes:

I got it from the USA patriot act text - http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

Originally posted by Pick


Keep the change.

He is not acting illegally and you guys are making it sound a lot worse than it really is and even fabricating what really is happening. Do you think, of all groups, conservatives would push for privacy-invasion ans the taking-away of the rights of the people? If you do, you are just plain ignorant, and can't see through your foggy brain to what this act is really doing.

The only ignorant person I see around these parts is you I am afraid.

You couldn't look up the Patriot Act yourself to try to disprove Igor, instead you had to make him prove to you that it is in there.

As a somebody who moved to America after living to 2 countries previously I see politics in a VERY different light to you.
You're sole exposure to politics is living in America whereas I have lived in Europe and Africa, I have seen more policies and actions affecting my life than you have, yet you call me ignorant when I question the motive of the goverment when they want to bring in a new law?

I think the problem is people like yourself you can't see through your foggy brain. You have been brought up to never question what the people in power are doing and what their motive is and so when other people do, you consider them ignorant?
Pah.....you are sad....stop being a sheep and think of the bigger picture, think of how it will affect YOU!
I can tell you I do, being a foreign national, albeit with American Citizenship, I am still wary of any law that may make my life subject to unscrupulous prying on the basis of I have lived in other countries.

Originally posted by igor@af


You must think you're so smart....:rolleyes:

I got it from the USA patriot act text - http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--
`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

You apparently are not intelligent enough to read down one line below it for the explanation........:rolleyes:

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; and.........
`(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

Originally posted by freakray


The only ignorant person I see around these parts is you I am afraid.

You couldn't look up the Patriot Act yourself to try to disprove Igor, instead you had to make him prove to you that it is in there.

As a somebody who moved to America after living to 2 countries previously I see politics in a VERY different light to you.
You're sole exposure to politics is living in America whereas I have lived in Europe and Africa, I have seen more policies and actions affecting my life than you have, yet you call me ignorant when I question the motive of the goverment when they want to bring in a new law?

I think the problem is people like yourself you can't see through your foggy brain. You have been brought up to never question what the people in power are doing and what their motive is and so when other people do, you consider them ignorant?
Pah.....you are sad....stop being a sheep and think of the bigger picture, think of how it will affect YOU!
I can tell you I do, being a foreign national, albeit with American Citizenship, I am still wary of any law that may make my life subject to unscrupulous prying on the basis of I have lived in other countries.

My post was not directed at you, but if the glove fits wear it, O.J. I was directing it at whoever believed what I said.

Not only did Igor look up the act for me, but he discredited himself. All I was asking is if he could direct me to where I could see the Patriot Act and its contents.

As for me following whoever's in power, that is simply NOT TRUE. So since I agree with Bush, I am just one of his puppets and I can't look past believing everything he says to what really matters? NO!! THis is the first time in eight years we, as a country, have been able to trust what is coming out of the White House. Jeez, this pisses me off!!!!!:mad: :mad: I am a dirty puppet who can't think for himself because I follow what my president that I elected believes ???!!!!!:mad:

I haven't agreed with everything Bush has done. He shouldn't have gone to the U.N., he should have attacked Iraq earlier, the AIDS bill is WAY too big and most of the money will never reach the people that need it, he should have vetoed Campaign Finance Reform, and there are some others. But for the most part, I agree with him. He has very similar political views to me. BUT I AM STILL A PUPPET???????

And your EXPOSURE to other countries politics has only dulled your ideals on American politics. I was born in the US and I'm damn proud of it. I've been out of the country before and personally,nothing compares to the freedoms and life I have in the US.

Originally posted by Pick


You apparently are not intelligent enough to read down one line below it for the explanation........:rolleyes:

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; and.........
`(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

I knew this was coming, and you better stop insulting me.
And yea, I can say this because I do run this board, insult me again and I will ban you. I never insulted you and nor did I do anything that can be justified of an insult.

Trying to prove that someone "appeared to intend to" is a piece of cake. So, the (B) provision is pointless and does not protect you or me. And so is (C).

Originally posted by igor@af


I knew this was coming, and you better stop insulting me.
And yea, I can say this because I do run this board, insult me again and I will ban you. I never insulted you and nor did I do anything that can be justified of an insult.

Trying to prove that someone "appeared to intend to" is a piece of cake. So, the (B) provision is pointless and does not protect you or me. And so is (C).

You did insult me. I'm not going to apologize, but I will just lay off you. What kind of message does it send out to others if you ban me because I STRONGLY disagree with you????? I'm done posting crap that can be seen as insults, but I'm still going to prove you guys wrong.

:o :o

Originally posted by Pick


My post was not directed at you, but if the glove fits wear it, O.J. I was directing it at whoever believed what I said.

Not only did Igor look up the act for me, but he discredited himself. All I was asking is if he could direct me to where I could see the Patriot Act and its contents.

As for me following whoever's in power, that is simply NOT TRUE. So since I agree with Bush, I am just one of his puppets and I can't look past believing everything he says to what really matters? NO!! THis is the first time in eight years we, as a country, have been able to trust what is coming out of the White House. Jeez, this pisses me off!!!!!:mad: :mad: I am a dirty puppet who can't think for himself because I follow what my president that I elected believes ???!!!!!:mad:

I haven't agreed with everything Bush has done. He shouldn't have gone to the U.N., he should have attacked Iraq earlier, the AIDS bill is WAY too big and most of the money will never reach the people that need it, he should have vetoed Campaign Finance Reform, and there are some others. But for the most part, I agree with him. He has very similar political views to me. BUT I AM STILL A PUPPET???????

And your EXPOSURE to other countries politics has only dulled your ideals on American politics. I was born in the US and I'm damn proud of it. I've been out of the country before and personally,nothing compares to the freedoms and life I have in the US.

Let me get this right, your post was posted in response to my post, yet it was not directed at me?
Mr Clinton I pressume?

Have you ever considered this, if Bush had not gone to the UN, he would be in the same position as Iraq was when it invaded Kuwait - remember the Gulf War?
He at least signalled his intent.
It's not like he blatantly attacked another country without warning, I will at least give him that much.

My ideals on American politics? You know nothing of them buddy.
One thing I do like about politics in America is the transparency with which the Govt. operates, it's a lot better than wondering what they're up to like you have to do in countries like South Africa.
There is nothing wrong with being proud of being American, I only wish more Americans would think on a global scale.
Exposure to other countries politics has made me appreciate the system here, but I can still not agree with the way it is run here.

Originally posted by freakray


Let me get this right, your post was posted in response to my post, yet it was not directed at me?
Mr Clinton I pressume?

Have you ever considered this, if Bush had not gone to the UN, he would be in the same position as Iraq was when it invaded Kuwait - remember the Gulf War?
He at least signalled his intent.
It's not like he blatantly attacked another country without warning, I will at least give him that much.

My ideals on American politics? You know nothing of them buddy.
One thing I do like about politics in America is the transparency with which the Govt. operates, it's a lot better than wondering what they're up to like you have to do in countries like South Africa.
There is nothing wrong with being proud of being American, I only wish more Americans would think on a global scale.
Exposure to other countries politics has made me appreciate the system here, but I can still not agree with the way it is run here.

My post was only quoting what you said. Like i said, if the glove fits wear it.;)
My ideas only global politics are still 'in the making', so cut me some slack.

Because of my 'non-pro-american gov' views I am sure I will get more bashing from my intelligent friends yog and pic ;) But I really don't care because inside they know who's more ignorant :) I honestly find it hard that you would in the slightest even hint at protecting a government that is in no way interested in 'protecting' its citizens (well the rich.... and corporations maybe).. I don't know the exact number of people but it's in the thousands.. that have been detained and held for no reason just because they were arab. There has already been tv documentaries about these people and how they were unjustly held and even abused just because they were arab, muslim or of middle-eastern descent. These 'patriot' acts are very much so what Hitler did in his 'wonderful' chancellor position. It's ironic how the US even supported hitler before he went 'tradical'.. These patriot acts (1 and 2) and whatever may follow are a step in the wrong direction.. you know if the US didn't screw around with the rest of the world it wouldn't have to worry about its security. People are not jealous of the US :rolleyes: some still believe that but anyways. I am just curious at what will happen once the first and second patriot acts get strongly ratified and how much further this will progress. I doubt many have even read what's proposed or already initated from these patriot acts. Quite simply 'they are 'unconstitutional' :/

Originally posted by igor@af
Yogs,

do you know the definition outlined for a "terrorist" in the USA Patriot Act?

Let me enlighten you -

"any person who commits an act which endangers human life and is a violation of State or Federal law"

I know you are a very smart person so I will not go into explaining what this means, as you can surely figure out for yourself.

This isn't fighting terrorism. This is bullshit. Ashcroft has setup a nice base for himself, where he can name anyone a "terrorist."
Now, he is trying to expand some provisions to give him more power to fight these 'terrorists,' but since the definition for a 'terrorist' is so broad, he can fight not only terrorists but jaywalkers and those who use cell phones while driving in NYC.

Why would the definition have to be so broad?

Stop for a minute. The main purpose of the patriot act is to get a handle on immigration. Thy byproduct would be in fighting terrorism although the word terrorism is what gets everyones panties in a bunch so thats the part everyone focuses on. Its the immigration thats that key issue.

At this point everyone should take a breath. I don't like the Patriot Act in the same way I don't like Campaign Finance Reform. Its unworkable in the way its written. They were both done to address a real problem (PA for the runaway immigration violations going on and 911. CFR to try and limit the effect of money on an election). They both have to go and they should try again.

Now that I've restated that....

You have completely misrepresented how Ashcroft (or anyone else) can name someone a terrorist. The arguement you used is a slippery slope one and has no merit on that alone. The fact is he is the top law enforcement official in the country. He's a cop. Cops want lots of rules and regulations and things to back them up. Its up to the the congress to make those rules. They are the ones you should be on if you don't like where something is going.

Have them repeal the laws you don't like. Its not as though thats never happened before (although it is one of the tougher ones outside the courts). Or wait for the law to be struck down if its unconstitutional like is happening with CFR.

The Chicken Little reaction of saying the US is on the road to a police state is just short of histerical.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Originally posted by YogsVR4
The Chicken Little reaction of saying the US is on the road to a police state is just short of histerical.


Someone by the name of Adolf Hitler assumed position of Chancelor and claimed the burning of the reich as a 'terrorist' act and hmm it was pointed at Jews... he was praised by the US and other western countries for his charismatic and energetic leadership, the way he bettered germany, etc... till of course the whole war started and he became too radical. Slowly after gaining power more and more he made his own rules to secure the state and clense it of 'terrorists' (replace this with whatever word), the new laws he brought about went against the 'german constitution'. Eventually he just became the main man and ran the things he liked.

So please don't be shocked that people aren't at least a little skeptical of what is going on and whether this repeating of history will also pass over the US.

Also don't you think it's a bit 'suspcisious' that people are so patriotic.. patriotism is not that different from nationalism. Also I find it absolutely amazing at how many american flags are all over the US. Whenever I watch an american channel I see an american flag every few minutes... i mean wth? If you go to Germany you won't find flags .. ironic isn't it?

It's really ironic.. just another right-wing american site (Everything non-pro-right wing patriotic american is too far to the left I guess).

And what about media control? Privatization of what shouldn't really be privatized (heck the media is privately owned to a great degree scuse me...) This is kind of ironic a socialist site criticizing new york times (yog pic whichever of you said something about new york times :) You sound like two brothers heh)

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/jun2003/frie-j06.shtml

Anyways its foolish not to be skeptical . As Descartes Rene said, to become a philosopher you have to at least once in your life doubt absolutely everything :)

More proof :p

http://www.dnash.org/fark/nazi-twins.jpg

Putting all jokes aside.. this is a serious matter...

Originally posted by Pick


You did insult me. I'm not going to apologize, but I will just lay off you. What kind of message does it send out to others if you ban me because I STRONGLY disagree with you????? I'm done posting crap that can be seen as insults, but I'm still going to prove you guys wrong.

:o :o

I am posting the following as a public statement rather than a PM for a simple reason to clarify any questions people may have about the AF policies.

It is not "if I ban you because you STRONGLY disagree with me."
It is "if I ban you because you INSULT me by saying that I am 'apparently are not intelligent enough to read down one line below.'"

I am all for debates, but NEVER cross the line of getting personal again, with me, or any other AF member.

It seems many Americans still do not know that their very freedom is at stake here, and slowly they're being taken away. The key word here is "slowly"--it is such that you don't notice it. Bush is wise enough to do that. Do it suddenly, and you'll have resistance everywhere. But do it slowly--get the people used to it, desensitize them by making it a daily matter that they're under "threat"--and you have made it perfect to set up a state that's fully controlled. It's not about to stop, and as Bush and his cronies further trot out "evidence" of "threats", they'll justify further and further the need for a police state, until such time that Americans will wake with the military on the streets, the police state in full fruition.

Originally posted by igor@af


I am posting the following as a public statement rather than a PM for a simple reason to clarify any questions people may have about the AF policies.

It is not "if I ban you because you STRONGLY disagree with me."
It is "if I ban you because you INSULT me by saying that I am 'apparently are not intelligent enough to read down one line below.'"

I am all for debates, but NEVER cross the line of getting personal again, with me, or any other AF member.

I can go with that.;)

Despite being a fiction (a well known intriguing fiction), 1984 a rather political novel written by George Orwell.. should be read by most Americans with much more then just taking it for a grain of salt.. But.. its written by a socialist so go figure.. right :rolleyes: Give it a try you two :) Its for your own good lol.. and perhaps you read it.. Might intrigue you since the totalitarian gov spawned from English Socialism SLOWLY hence Ingsoc (the main ruling party). The point of the story was that even from a 'for the people' with all the best ideals and goals for the people a society can go wrong and become totalitarian without the people noticing. Do you seriously think NAZI Germans thaught they were losing anything? The Jews certainly did...

I see a strong parallel between Adolf Hitler's unfair (as in through cheating and manipulationg) rise to power as Chanecolor with Bush and his reagen ghost crew rising to power.

The burning of the reich and blaming them on Jews as the wtc blaming it at Muslims.

Hitler wanting to secure the homeland and so he breaks german constitution or whatever its called and creates laws that are opposite to it and progressively does so. It's intruiging how there is the whole 'homeland security' homeland.. motherland whatever :)

The love of corporations is evident in both.

The MASSIVE amounts of american flags is on a rise.. patriotism.. how is it any different the nationalism :/

Germany claimed that the invasion of polland was in fact in defense.. the us claimed the attack on Iraq was in self-defense (and yes claimed a hell of a lot.. but cant stress enough "Iraq is a threat here, there, and everywhere bullshit".. while in fact it was the weakest country in the region after years of sanctions and bombing)

On the side the US has attacked many countries, thrown off many countries (including democracies and installed its own 'top-down democracies'. installed dictatorships as that of the Sha in Iran, should be responsible for millions upon millions of deaths but isn't.. Clearly a line of government with no intention of love and peace but dominion and expansion; greed and power.

Sure perhaps the US is slower at it.. but you can be quite skeptical and say hmm what if.. at the least.. :rolleyes:

Since the Hitler term has come up again :rolleyes: Its safe to say this topic is now dead. The same people who are the Chicken Littles keep invoking his name. So lets cut to chase and get all the Hitler comparisons out there. Since the logic by some people here :rolleyes: is that if you say it enough it must be true.

Chretien is just like Hitler and Canada is headed to towards being a police state.

Jacques Chirac is just like Hitler and France is headed to towards being a police state.

Gerhard Schröder is just like Hitler and Germany is headed to towards being a police state.

King Gyanendra is just like Hitler and Nepal is headed to towards being a police state.

Incumbent Gnassingbe Eyadéma is just like Hitler and Togo is headed to towards being a police state.

Jan Peter Balkenende is just like Hitler and the Netherlands is headed to towards being a police state.

Néstor Carlos Kirchner is just like Hitler and Agentina is headed to towards being a police state.

Davíd Oddsson is just like Hitler and Iceland is headed to towards being a police state.

Filip Vujanovic is just like Hitler Serbia nad Montenegro is headed to towards being a police state.

President Abdelaziz Bouteflika is just like Hitler and Algeria is headed to towards being a police state.

President Pierre Buyoya is just like Hitler and Burundi is headed to towards being a police state.

Nicanor Duarte Frutos is just like Hitler and Paraguay is headed to towards being a police state.

Olusegun Obasanjo is just like Hitler a Nigeria IS a police state.

Anneli Jäätteenmäki is just like Hitler and Finland is headed to towards being a police state.

Juhan Parts is just like Hitler and Estonia is headed to towards being a police state.

Borislav Paravac is just like Hitler and Bosnia-Herszegovinia is headed to towards being a police state.

Mahmoud Abbas is just like Hitler and Pelestine is headed to towards being a police state.

Hu Jintao is just like Hitler and China is a police state.

President Ange-Félix Patassé is just like Hitler and Central African Republic is headed to towards being a police state.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan is just like Hitler and Turkey is headed to towards being a police state.

Fidel Castro is just like Hitler and Cuba is a police state.

Said Musa is just like Hitler and Belize is headed to towards being a police state.

Robert Kocharyan is just like Hitler and Armenia is headed to towards being a police state.

Václav Klaus is just like Hitler and the Zeck Republic is headed to towards being a police state.

Wolfgang Schüssel is just like Hitler and Austria is headed to towards being a police state.

Ariel Sharon is just like Hitler and Israel is headed to towards being a police state.

Roh Moo Hyun is just like Hitler and South Korea is headed to towards being a police state.

Tassos Papadopoulos is just like Hitler and Cyprus is headed to towards being a police state.

Maxwell Richards is just like Hitler and Trinidad is headed to towards being a police state.

Lucio Gutiérrez Borbúa is just like Hitler and Ecuador is headed to towards being a police state.

Rolandas Paksas is just like Hitler and Lithuania is headed to towards being a police state.

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is just like Hitler and Brazil is headed to towards being a police state.

Pascal Couchepin is just like Hitler and Switzerland is headed to towards being a police state.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/avatar.php?userid=44457&dateline=1053747044:cool:

Some interesting links on this page.If only we could persuade some of the Bush loyalists who desperately cling to the mantra that "America can do no wrong " to read and watch with an open and critical mind.


Nah,we'd be better off trying to staple an elephant to the ceiling.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by taranaki
Some interesting links on this page.If only we could persuade some of the Bush loyalists who desperately cling to the mantra that "America can do no wrong " to read and watch with an open and critical mind.


Nah,we'd be better off trying to staple an elephant to the ceiling.:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)