mothermopar
New member
I was under the impression you could take a clump of plutonium and throw it at the ground and it would detonate?! LMAO!
I was under the impression you could take a clump of plutonium and throw it at the ground and it would detonate?! LMAO!
Lance Oregon said:Perhaps this new proposed law does make sense? Could Mayor Bloomberg possibly be right for once? Or could a law like this be abused by the Government?
It seems like the real concern is that the media wanted the terrorist to be a tea-partier, rather than the islmo-fascist he was.
My concern is that anyone who attendes a tea party or listens to Rush could be put on the terror watch list....
By the way, that use of insanity is technically incorrect
Kimberdawg, I would really love to see your source for this claim. Please provide one, or I will have to call BS on this.As our own government has lost 206 Kg of plutonium
You guys get stirred up over anything.
Since when did anyone make Fox News Channel as an authoritative figure on FACTS?
Reported on the news that they want people on the watch list AND on the no fly list to be banned from firearm purchases.
Considering the secret nature of these lists, and the mechanism for appeal (none?) I have a huge problem with this.
Perhaps this new proposed law does make sense? Could Mayor Bloomberg possibly be right for once? Or could a law like this be abused by the Government?
That's a brilliant idea. Of course it wouldn't pass, but that's not the point; think of the debate it would spark. (offer it as an amendment to S.1317 just to make sure they understand the metaphor)Imagine if the media could lose their First Amendment right to blather cluelessly if they were on a secret terrorist watchlist and there was no appeal to such a decision. Would anyone think that was OK? Would we see U. S. Senators proposing such a bill?