WHO is REALLY a "MARXIST"?

Right on! The Italian fascists did the same. History noow sees them for what they were. History will similarly see the fascist Neocons, too, for what they were.

the op is someone who obviously has no idea what he or she is talking about.

Next year op, when you enter ninth grade, will you be taking the bus or will you be a walker?

Even I'm not a "Marxist", but simply a pissed off Jude who didn't get the teaching position I deserved in German academia. I guess I showed them. But I don't mind my name being used loosely as a label for the weakminded who've been indoctrinated, in Pavlovian fashion, by my people to think in and respond to the labels my people created to control them.

the op is someone who obviously has no idea what he or she is talking about.

unless you somehow are the op, the above statement would be false!

everything the op said is true,, but that is just the tip of the iceberg

Malu,,,,,you're my favorite,,,,,,,,moron.

stalin was a stalinist.

Malu,,,,,you're my favorite

awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww... i love you too

OP doesn't even know the difference between a Marxist and a Stalinist.

OP will be riding the short bus to "school".

as far as "malu" goes, judging from his postings, he is certifiably insane and can be safely ignored.

that is all.

as far as "malu" goes, judging from his postings, he is certifiably insane and can be safely ignored.

that is all.

gosh,,, are you two going to throw a party for me,,, sweet



are you going to take me off your list of people to round up then? thanks,,,

51479,
you know...you like to tell what things are "not" but i've yet to hear you actually answer what things "are"...please, what are your opinions on the bush adminstration and:

Secretely taping phone conversations

Political Assasinations (and/or attempts)

Official offices of Propaganda

Secret Detention Facilities

when you get done answering salamadirs questions,,, i will prepare a list for you as well 58,, you seem to be so wise!

Secretely taping phone conversations aka intercepting and analyzing terrorist communications per the war powers act

Political Assasinations (and/or attempts): please specify, otherwise you are talking out your ass again

Official offices of Propaganda AKA as the OHS which sane americans understand was created to protect the people from further terrorism.

Secret Detention Facilities AKA as jails/prisons for enemy combatants and necessary in the WAT.

any more bullshit you would like to sling?

so you think you explained everything away 58 ? war powers act,,, i don't remember a congress voting on it? i remember an unelected president lying to congress about reasons to go to war,,,

which we all know now were horseshit!

study up malu.

feigning a lack of "memory" displays your general ignorance on these issues.

**Secretely taping phone conversations**


The word you're looking for is "secretly," not "secretely." My opinion on the matter is that it is not only legal and constitutional to monitor international exchanges between American citizens and others within our borders who correspond with enemy elements, but that it is vital to national security.

**Political Assasinations (and/or attempts)**


I am not aware of any political assassinations that the Bush administration has attempted or carried out. If you are aware of any, please provide the names.


**Official offices of Propaganda**



Please provide the name of the department(s) which could be described as an "Official Office of Propaganda." I am not aware that any such agency exists, though I do think it would be an excellent idea to combat the propaganda efforts of our enemies, which do indeed have such departments.


**Secret Detention Facilities**


I am quite satisfied that the need for such facilities exists and am pleased that foreign enemies of the US are detained in them.

How predictible!

All of the above are acceptable (at least according to #58) under the guise of protecting us from "terra"

Since you're such a genius and we're all on the 'short bus', let's start with the firts thing:

Why don't you explain why the Bush administration, who has the ability to get INSTANT warrants from the judiciary at ANY time, 24/7, would NOT seek to do so in the current case of the NSA phone tapping. You can't even use the excuse that 'they don't have time' to do so, because it takes NO time, it's not the same avenue as the FBI getting warrants.

And what about the issue of the FBI and NSA infiltrating and surveiling NON VIOLENT peace groups that have NOTHING to do with Al Queda?

Let me guess, your response will include something about how dumb the Democrats are, which while valid, has NOTHING to do with the issue at hand.

IT IS IN BLACK AND WHITE in the VERY CONSTITUTION we are supposedly killing people to uphold, that the Military is NOT to be used for domestic law enforcement. And that there is protection against unwarranted search and seizure. WITHOUT CHECKS AND BALANCES there is NO assurance that such power will not be abused.

Waiting

this is not a domestic law enforcement issue.

btw

truth and facts have a bad habit of being "predictable".

Oh, and here's MORE evidence of how BRILLIANT our detention centers are protecting us:

U.S. to Send 5 Detainees Home From Guantanamo
Australian, Four Britons Allege Abuse

By Carol D. Leonnig and Glenn Frankel
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 12, 2005; Page A01

An Australian terrorism suspect who says he was tortured in an Egyptian jail after being sent there by the United States will be released from custody in the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, along with the last four British citizens held there, the Pentagon announced yesterday.

Clever, 58, still you can't answer the question. You're a great spelling cop, but play loose and free with "facts", quite "predictibly"

I have not corrected your spelling.

You are confusing me with the only other sane poster on this thread.

And I have answered each and every allegation.

Please provide details regarding your charge of political assassinations.

hmmmm....

november7, 1973...
"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.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

where does it say the president can go against the constitution that requires a court ordered warrant to gain information...let alone on USA citizens?

or which war power act are you speaking of?

the war powers act that was passed shortly after 9/11.

bear in mind that Bush's authorization requires that at least one of the parties be outside the country and linked to al-Qaida or an affiliated organization.

why does the bush turn a blind eye to what is going on at los alamos? why don't they investigate that?

why doesn't the bush admin investigate the scientist who was caught in the lab on tape during the anthrax scare,,,?

i don't know 58, but my feelings tell me we are walking into a toltarian state,,, but then again,, i am not you,, and this is a free forum..

nevermind me...just putting thoughts and ideas down...

from constitution:
"Clause 8:

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."


yep, he promised that....

we may be malu.

Los Alamos was under Clinton's watch, no?

Political assasinations, 58?

Okay...I could immediately point to the retaliation against Joseph Wilson and wife, but of course, we cannot comment on that because it is still under investigation

Or perhaps what happened to Senator Max Cleland of Georgia comes to mind: and you can't tell me the conservative think tank behind Bush wasn't behind painting a decorated 'Nam vet who lost both legs in war as a TRAITOR and WEAKLING, smearing him in print and on television as "on the side of terrorist" for not supporting the current phony war, costing him his election.

Or howabout people from within Bush's OWN inner circle? Larry Lindsey spark a bell in your dense head? HE WAS BUSH'S CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISOR. "In 2002 he predicted that the cost of a war with Iraq could range between $100 billion and $200 billion at best. The administration dismissed the figure, and Lindsey was soon fired. "

Shall I go on? Or do these not fit into your criteria?

58....

but don't you see? bush had the power immmediately before and after 9/11 to go to a secret court and gain access through legal warrant...to anyone's info....

yet...he breaks the constitutional rights...

is that stupid or what?
btw...simply putting thoughts out...not attacking anyone or their position...just trying to figure this out.

are you joking?

Joe Wilson?

last time I checked assassinations were more in the order of Allende et al.

hmmmm....
"Section. 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

so...what would be considered a high crime or misdemeanor?

ps: i do like others opinions on things and do try to see both or all sides...even a coin has three sides.